Leaderboard

  1. ynot

    ynot

    Regular Members


    • Informative Content

      243

    • Content count

      8,969


  2. Fossildude19

    Fossildude19

    Administrator


    • Informative Content

      213

    • Content count

      18,702


  3. Harry Pristis

    Harry Pristis

    Editing Members


    • Informative Content

      144

    • Content count

      5,603


  4. Kane

    Kane

    Moderator


    • Informative Content

      132

    • Content count

      1,839



Popular Content

Showing most informative content since 06/28/2017 in all areas

  1. 14 likes
    Welcome to the Forum. This looks like fish material - you can clearly see a fish vertebra in your second to last photo. The plates look like the left side of the skull, and possibly more. Neat find. You might be able to scrape away the excess matrix using dental tools. Thanks for posting this - and Welcome, again. Regards,
  2. 13 likes
    Listen and learn, Grasshopper. There is much to know; take the time to know it Please understand that an erroneous comment made here, and left uncontested, will be read by thousands of people, some of whom will take it as true. Best to stick with what you know and have verified, or to ask your thought as a question ("Is it usually difficult to classify any further than "fish" with just that much bone?").
  3. 11 likes
    Traditionally these small coiled attached shells have been identified as Spirobis, a polychaete worm. More recently, studies of the shell microstructure suggests that these are only superficially similar to Spirobis, and they actually belong to the Microconchida, an extinct order possibly related to the lophophorates. Nice specimen! Don
  4. 9 likes
    I posted a portion of a shark braincase in this sub-forum on June 7th of 2014 that I had sent to the American Museum of Natural History in November of 2011. Dr. John Maisey is their curator of fossil fishes and the leading expert of Paleozoic sharks so I thought he should be the one to have a look. When he proposed writing a paper on it I donated it to the museum collection. That was September of 2012 and he has just now gotten past peer review with the paper and it will be in the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology soon. It is already available in their digital edition. Over 5 years has been a long time to wait but I am very glad I got the chance to make this contribution since it appears to be from the largest known shark of it's time. We still don't know which shark it is but there have been some very large teeth found at the Jacksboro Texas Lost Creek Dam site where this was found so maybe someday we will. A search for shark brain case will bring up some related posts on TFF. The paper is titled: A Pennsylvanian ‘supershark’ from Texas , John G. Maisey, Allison W. Bronson, Robert R. Williams & Mark Mckinzie. Edit: You can view the contribution on the second pinned page at the 15th post.
  5. 9 likes
    Hey all, On Thursday some colleagues and I published a new archaeocete-like baleen whale from the Oligocene of South Carolina. This is one of the most primitive baleen whales known, and the skull bears many primitive features in common with basilosaurid archaeocetes. We named it Coronodon havensteini - Coronodon refers to the cusps which make a crown-shape, and the species name after Mark Havenstein who collected the specimen. A life restoration I've made of the animals likely gross-looking mouth can be seen below, along with a photograph of the skull. Here's some press releases: http://www.postandcourier.com/news/beast-from-the-past-wando-river-fossil-turns-out-to/article_cd4317c0-5ce5-11e7-965a-274b18c78111.html http://today.cofc.edu/2017/06/29/baleen-whale-fossil-current-biology/ And here's the published article: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(17)30704-2 And if you go to the Mace Brown Museum of Natural History facebook page, there's a video of me on the news last night being interviewed! Edit: our collections manager uploaded the news clip to youtube:
  6. 7 likes
    I recently posted a report here about the finds I made on a trip to the Wutach Valley and promised that the next time I went there, I would finally remember to take my camera along. For those of you who may not be aware, the Wutachtal (in German) is quite a large area and also the name of a municipality in the southeastern Black Forest region. Within this area are a good number of beautiful nature reserves, the best known of which is the Wutachschlucht, or Wutach Gorge in English. It's not quite as huge as the Grand Canyon, but is certainly comparable with the Verdon Gorge, a famous tourist trap in the Provence in France. The Wutach (English: angry brook) has its source in the highest peak of the Black Forest massif, and winds its way eastward through crystalline paleozoic sediments and then more and more rapidly cutting down through first Permian, then Triassic and finally Jurassic and Cenozoic layers. One would think when you move down that the layers would get older, but due to 2 successive tectonic uplifts in the Late Jurassic and late Cretacous periods, the entire southern German tectonic plate is tipped 7° to the east. All of the Cretaceous sediments were also eroded away a long time ago, which is why they can't be found, even underground, in southwestern Germany. The area that has particularly interested me is the one in the municipality of Wutachtal, where a good portion of the Jurassic layers are exposed. It's a classical area for geologists and paleontologists and of course amateur collectors like myself. I've been exploring and looking for exposures for many years, first focussing on the Lower Jurassic, then particularly the Middle Jurassic Aalenian and Bajocian stages and now for going on 2 years, I've been concentrating my efforts on the Callovian Wutach Formation. I've managed to find an area where I've been able to regularly make some finds and recently returned to an exposure which panned out quite well, so I decided I definitely had to get back there again soon. So I was just there yesterday. Here come some pics of it to which I'll first describe the exposure for you. What you see here is a series of mostly soft clay marl layers with the odd hard marly limestone bank in between. Almost all of the sediment is extremely turbidite and full of iron oolites, which accounts for the pronounced red, reddish-brown, yellowy and violet tints. In the middle of the photo is the negative imprint of a large Macrocephalites ammonite which I dug out on the previous excursion. This imprint sits on top of a hard limestone bank. The sediment above it is a much softer clay, which allows mostly for a successful excavation of the fossils in this particular bank. And at this partular small exposure I should add. Conditions can vary when one moves horizontally. Nevertheless, fossils found in this bank here are by far the best preserved. This photo shows the same layers, just a little to the right. And here a little to the left. Note the white limestone sinter, which can be a disturbance to the fossils. The lithological name for this zone is the "Rotes Erlager". As a biozone it's called the herveyi zone. This is about 1 meter thick. This pile which lies between pic 1 & 3 accomodates my scree, broken bits of ammonites, for the moment. I'll be removing it later on, just as I have in the past at the other points, in order to get at the layers. This was my first find of the day. Looks to be a Choffatia sp. Slightly deformed. A couple more. Not easy to see what's in the matrix, is it? Now you know why I use an air abrader You just have to break up some of these big rocks in order to get the little jewels out. Otherwise your knapsack is so heavy by the end of a successful day, that you can't heave it onto your back any more. At this point, I'd dug into the sinter vein. Time to get it out and get around it. I've just run out of pixels. Time to move on to the next post
  7. 7 likes
    That is one of the plates from a crinoid calyx. Here's an example from an image I found online.
  8. 7 likes
    This is a typical preservation of the larger shrimp found in Mazon called the Belotelson magister. Here is a link showing a very similar specimen. http://www.virtualmuseumofgeology.com/mazon-creek-fauna.html
  9. 7 likes
    I think: lookey here ...maybe...
  10. 7 likes
    Resolved! First record of the Cenomanian (Cretaceous) ammonite Pachydesmoceras maroccanum from North America.pdf
  11. 7 likes
    Troodon and Lord Trilobite aren't the only people with strong knowledge of dinosaur fossils. I've been collecting dinosaur fossils and prepping at the Denver museum paleo lab for over 20 years. Has this forum become that Troodon dependent, that his opinion is the one true answer? I think others deserve a chance in here too. At the very least you gave Lord-Trilobite some credit. I also have access to both the Jonathan and Bert Thescelosaurus skeletons in the collection of the Rocky Mountain Dinosaur Resource Center. I'm down there helping identify fossils for and with them several times a year. So I've gotten a pretty good look at the bones of those individuals. Anyway, back to the vertebra in question. The two most useful of Hyracotherium's pictures, are unfortunately a bit dark and taken obliquely. I've brightened them up, and cropped them. I've place arrows showing the same lateral ridge that your Google picture has. My Judith River Formation caudal vertebra has the same lateral ridge. Hell Creek Formation Thescelosaurus caudals show the same characteristic. This lateral ridge can vary in prominence depending on where the centrum is located in the tail. As I said before, this is a mid-caudal vertebra centrum. Below are Hyracotherium's enhanced photos showing the lateral ridge much more clearly. I've also attached a photo of my museum research grade cast of a complete mid-caudal vertebra that would be a bit more anterior in location on the tail.
  12. 7 likes
    ONE snake and ONE scorpion?! Maybe you haven't spent much time in the field. Such encounters are inevitable if you are turning rocks. (Even scuba-diving in rivers will result in such encounters.) Get yourself a stout garden tool -- I used a wood-handled dandelion digger with a steel tip I bent into an "L" shape. Never use your hands to flip a rock. Wear leather gloves. Stay alert to your surroundings. If your fear of snakes is paralyzing, de-sensitize yourself by attending local herp society meetings. (Not much opportunity to self-treat your fear of scorpions in such a setting, I think.) Don't try to dispatch such a creature in an encounter . . . go on about your business, giving the creature some space.
  13. 7 likes
    Already have a tiny museum next to my house and would like to find a Cryolo tooth but a bit too cold for me on the collecting side.
  14. 6 likes
    Your darker rock is a fine-grained quartz conglomerate which is a sedimentary rock. Since most of the quartz clasts are larger than 2mm it is a conglomerate. If the grain size were below 2mm then it would be a sandstone.
  15. 6 likes
    Your vertebra is from a shark or ray. The layered edge is consistent with Squatina but I think Brachyrhizodus is possible too.
  16. 6 likes
    If you are buying it in person, take a black light with you. The repair/restoration glows. You can get a cheap black light for under $10. If buying by mail, you can ask for the seller to take a picture under a black light. I do it all the time. Here is an example of what it will look like. Joe
  17. 6 likes
    Welcome to the Forum. It looks like a gastropod fragment. The big Helmets have similar denticles on the outer lip. picture from here
  18. 6 likes
    Definitely mammoth. The white material is cementum which binds the enamel plates together.
  19. 6 likes
    They usually let You know they are there. Just give them room. Most American scorpions stings are no worse than a bee sting. Unless You are allergic to their venom it is a mild annoyance.
  20. 6 likes
    How big is the first specimen? I could see it as a partial mammoth molar with possibly two plates.
  21. 6 likes
    Hi Joshua, I really like that you have posted this thread because I very recently dug a SUV load of geodes from KY and I had similar questions. So many of them seemed to have degrees of conformity, plus I knew the area was also crinoid rich. Therefore, the following publication by Ray Smith Bassler, The Formation of geodes with remarks on the silification...was an eye opener. It is a free ebook at the following link. https://books.google.com/books?id=Tc4qAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA140&lpg=PA140&dq=geode+crinoids+calyx&source=bl&ots=LCXjqvTihH&sig=0AldK3dP7kNkVOnymG83vijFgno&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVv6fElPbUAhXKPz4KHVLnAXYQ6AEIIzAI#v=onepage&q=geode crinoids calyx&f=false It seems that crinoid, brachiopods and other calcitic organisms often provided open spaces in the rock for silica rich deposition. Sometimes these geodized fossils are found still representative of the original form, but oftentimes in the silification process, the fossil exploded and the minerals continued to grow tracing the fracture lines and then transversing them, resulting in those wonderfully knobby psuedomorph fossil geodes. I think that might be what you have. However, I am interested to learn what others think. Look at these illustrations and descriptions and read this page from the ebook and see what you think about it. Tomorrow, I will take specific pics of some that I have that look like yours. Again, thank you for posting such an interesting topic! Leah
  22. 6 likes
    WELCOME to the forum, and what a GREAT way to start! Two of the smaller specimens on the bottom appear to have pinched ends, which can be indicative of sphincter marks. It could be a section from a latrine area where a larger dropping melded into the smaller ones beneath it prior to fossilization (or something ate some really bad dino ). Scanning the photo, I'm not seeing any definite inclusions other than one possibility in the somewhat damaged area on the left. Can you tell tell me whether that is a small piece of darker, smoother material at the base of that or if it is just a shadow? Also, would you mind posting a photo of the broken edge on the bottom? It is really hard to tell from the photo if these are phosphatic, calciferous, or even siliceous. Knowing the formation in which it was found could help. You could try the lick test if you are so inclined. If it is a coprolite, there is a good chance that it is comprised of calcium phosphate. Some phosphatic coprolites (as well as bone) will stick if you touch them to the tip of your tongue. If you are not feeling that brave you can just touch it with wet fingers to see if feels sticky (same test, just not nearly as much fun). If it sticks, I would feel pretty comfortable identifying them as coprolites from a latrine area...and it really doesn't get much better than that! If not, without the presence of undigested flora/fauna, the best I can say is they are possibly coprolites.
  23. 6 likes
    There's been quite a discussion going on here since my last visit. Thanks for all your thoughts and contributions, everybody. I believe now that I've been leading us all on a wild goose chase and I'd like to apologize for that. To quote myself: " I'm thinking more and more that it could have been dropped there, but one thing's for certain. It's not from me. Even if it was inadvertent and completely unconscious, I have never collected something like this in my life." I was so sure when I wrote that, but... Kane asked again: " Roger, are you absolutely certain this didn't get mixed up with anything on your end (matrix debris)? I don't suspect that it is, but just to rule it out." Well, I figured if there's a shadow of doubt, I might as well try to get to the bottom of this in order to rule it out. So I checked out all the possibilities from the sites I've visited in the past which might produce something like this and ended up at "the ditch" in the Kimmeridgian in the Danube Valley where I had a closer look at the sutures on the inner whorls of the ammonite species Aspidoceras acanthicum. Here they are. And here's the whole specimen. You can see that the sutures get more and more complicated as the whorls progress. What had me stymied is that the entire little "goniatite" is pyritized (and I believe that middevonian is also correct about the limonite), both of which are not all that common at this site. But it does occur more heavily at certain spots so the possibility is given. I remember that every once in a while I find some little things there and drop them in one of my collecting bags, so I guess that's what happened, and when I emptied my bag after the trip with Kane and mixed it up with the real goniatites, then the damage was done completely outside of my awareness. Once again, I'm sorry to have caused such a tempest in a teapot, but I claim innocence due to ignorance. I certainly have learned a lot anyway and I'd like to thank everyone for their extremely helpful, knowledgeable and considered suggestions. This all really helped me to get to the bottom of it.
  24. 5 likes
    I know I'm being a curmudgeon about this, but putting an actual genus name (Rhynchonella) on a specimen of unknown geological origin and age seems a bridge too far. It could actually be a Rhychonella, but given the level of homeomorphy within the group labeling it as a "rhynchonellid", or at most cf Rhynchonella (comparable form to Rhynchonella) would be more appropriate. Don
  25. 5 likes
    Those serrations on the mesial carinae are far too large to be dromaeosauridae. I actually think the distal part of the tooth has been broken/worn off. I'd lean more towards an abelisaurid tooth.
  26. 5 likes
    Here are a few different avian quadrate bones, showing the species variability within the basic functional form. Note that the "twistiness" of the main beam is often a notable feature.
  27. 5 likes
    Volcaniclastic sedimentation: http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/facies.htm
  28. 5 likes
    Welcome to the Forum! The first one is a very interesting find especially by its preservation status. It looks to me the remnant of a crinoid crown (calyx + arms). Just an example of a similar one, in good preservation: pictures from here
  29. 5 likes
    These are Chinese trilobites: Ductina vietnamica figures from: Han, N., & Chen G.Y. (2007) Moulting variability in the Middle Devonian trilobite Ductina from Nandan, Guanxi, China. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 46(2):167-182
  30. 5 likes
    I hope this is the right spot for this information. I use to live in NJ an there is a site that not to many people take advantage of. In Highlands, (Monmouth County) at the end of Shore Drive there is a little park(Popomora). If you walk to the end of the beach to where the boulders start, in the wash and in the rocks you can find many different types of fossils. We have found some really nice opalized ammonite pieces and quite a few baculites. Now I know the Marl Pits are closed , but we always found them on the water side of the Henry Hudson Trail.If you decide to take a walk down the trail about a half mile or so towards Atlantic Highlands is a small stream, there might be a small bridge there, it tends to wash out with the storms. But anyway on the water side we have found some really nice stuff there. I hope this helps someone looking for new sites. While you are there you can swim and fish also. Good Luck.
  31. 5 likes
    You've done well!!! Very nice finds. The two vertebrae in your original post look like Iguanodon caudals (tail verts). The others are too rolled to be certain but the second could be a rib fragment as you suggested. You could try the paraloid but even that is not likely to prevent pyrite decay.
  32. 5 likes
    The photos above show that all's not always what meets the eye. What looks to be a nicely preserved ammonite on on side is often disturbed or even missing altogether on the other. This happens quite often. I'd estimate that at the most a third of what I dig out is worth taking home. And then even more gets culled in the workshop after prep. I've placed my hammer at the base of the koenigi biozone, which is called lithologically the "Graublaues Erzlager". Erz means ore, by the way. These layers used to be mined in the past for their iron in certain areas. The colors speak for themselves: grey-blue. It has a thickness of roughly 2 meters. Only a portion of it exists here, since this exposure is part of a landslip which slid down the hill during a large landslide many years ago. I'm about to extract these ammonites from the koenigi zone. They look quite alright, but I'm not expecting much, since most of the fossils from here are extremely weathered and fall apart easily. Sure enough. Even the one on the right was missing the inner whorls. This one was in one of the few concretions which occur in that zone, so it's at least worth taking home for closer inspection. A series of finds which found their way into my bag.
  33. 5 likes
    From the first picture, the two on the left are Horse conchs. They have been known under various names Fasciolaria/Pleuroploca /Triplofusus gigantea/giganteus however current classification by WoRMS is Triplofusus papillosus (G. B. Sowerby I, 1825). LINK
  34. 5 likes
    That's amazing! I think you need a sponge specialist here but browsing through the Porifera Treatise I came across this, Amplaspongia, an Ordovician lithistid from Australia that seems similar, with evenly spaced spikes (to give them their technical term ). (x1 in the original figure which is only a couple of inches high so about the right scale.)
  35. 5 likes
    The first tooth is Squalicorax probably S. kaupi, the second Scapanorhynchus texanus.
  36. 5 likes
    And you have been told, repeatedly (and with patience and respect), that it is not "...A FOOTPRINT WITH A CLAW stuck in some sort of agate or whatever its on and in..." Redirecting the discussion to your feeling that you have somehow been abused by the responses is disingenuous, if not trollish. It is also rather rude behavior to those who made the effort to respond to your request for help.
  37. 5 likes
    Yep twice. Mother nature does this....Lycopod leaves. Here's a sample I have from Alabama that showing a similar overlap.... I dont have any 7's. Cool finds. Regards, Chris
  38. 5 likes
    I'm still with crinoid. As @ynot says, the inner curve is too crisp and parallel for a coral and it looks like a raised margin. The sediment doesn't necessarily reflect the width of the lumen, it's just filling a saucer shaped depression as in these:
  39. 5 likes
  40. 5 likes
    My rock pick is used 90% of the time to turn rocks. Always lift the rocks so that the rock is between you and what ever might be beneath. When I encounter a snake, a scorpion or worse (yes, there are worse things) I generally take a good long look and then gently lay the rock back down. I'll then move to a different area. Worse things: Wasps, because they can fly and will even chase you; Giant Texas Centipedes, big, fast and one of the few things that give s me the willies; Velvet Ants, pretty bugs with a stupendous punch (AKA cow killers); Ants, often the really little ones can swarm over you fast and then you realize that it ain't easy to dance about on a rocky talus slope...
  41. 5 likes
    I agree with the others that this is likely a crinoid columnal.
  42. 5 likes
    Very nice specimen. Here's what I would do... The matrix looks to be mostly soft so I would take a brush and apply a small amount of acetone to an area and use a dental pick to remove the sediment. You can also use a cloth dampened in acetone to wipe away residue. DO NOT use water. sub-fossil bone is hydrophilic and will quickly absorb water and become even more brittle. Once you have the specimen clean, procure some Paraloid, Butvar, or Vinac (McGean B-15). Dissolve the plastic in acetone using a ratio of 50 parts acetone to 1 part plastic by volume. slowly pour, drop, or brush this onto any exposed cancellous bone. Allow to dry (will be very quick) and repeat until you begin to see a slight sheen appear on the bone. You may even notice the solution start to wet the area opposite of application. If that is the case, you have completely penetrated the interior structure of the bone. Allow the specimen to dry overnight. Next, apply the solution with a brush to the exterior surface of the bone making sure to evenly apply and not leave thick pools of solution. This will produce an even looking light sheen on the bone. Pay special attention to cracks adding more solution here. Once you start to see the solution is not absorbing as fast, allow the specimen to dry overnight again. At this point, your preservation is complete. If the shiny appearance of the bone is undesirable, you can wipe the surface bone with a cloth dampened with acetone. This will remove some of the plastic on the surface without compromising the consolidation of the bone.
  43. 5 likes
    Not everyone is competitive in their fossil hunting. The rules of the contest are fair and they have been explained extensively. Those that want to enter the contest under the rules will do so. The goal is not to grow the contest into some giant competitive event with an ever increasing number of "participation trophies". If members want to enter under the current rules, that's awesome. If not, then there are plenty of other places on TFF to showcase them or get your Kudos. Take advantage of them.
  44. 5 likes
    Mike, The rules were put in place LONG before I had anything to do with moderation or administration. It really is not a matter of "not being interested in changes". Change is often embraced here on the Forum. It is a matter of fairness to those who find, collect, prep, (or get pictures of the prep) and enter their fossils for the contest in the current month, as stated in the rules. We have changedd the Contest in the past, to make the distinction between verts and inverts/plants. Ultimately, any further change in categories would only make it easier to win for people who collect those categories of fossils. I agree with the original tenets of the Contest, and feel more categories would dilute the award. You ask... "So should any prep done past the month of find be disqualified?" No. But to make it fair, the majority of the prep needs to happen in the month of the contest. And the before and after pictures need to be included in the post. I think this is more than fair, and logical. This is supposed to be fun, contest. Honestly, I'd rather see an award go to people who posts in the Collections Gallery Area. You state that you had to wait a month to get the fossil back. That unfortunately, does not meet the criteria. Nowhere does it state in the rules that you have to have the fossil in your possesion at the time of the contest. The Month when prep is finished is just that - When prep is finished. Not when you receive the fossil back. That is where the line ends. I'm sorry that your two fossils were not eligible according to the rules. Again, with e-mail, it really should not be that difficult to get pictures of the fossil once prep is done. "Yes it requires a change in your rules but it also allows more honest collectors to enter their finds". As far as dishonest members, ... well,... unfortunately, we have had some in the past, and it has affected Fossil of the Month Contest. It is a sad but true reality. Who knows why petty people are motivated to be dishonest when it comes to a virtual award sticker on their profile. Bragging rights and a badge on the profile is not really worth any dishonesty. If showcasing your finds is all you are after, ...why not post them in the Collections Gallery? The Member's Gallery, Member Collections, and the open boards are all available to showcase personal finds that we are proud of, as well. Why not make use of these areas?
  45. 5 likes
    Did you read the entire thread I linked?, ... because a lot of the same arguments were made. First and foremost, this contest is supposed to be for fun. It is a way for people to showcase their best finds for that month. This is a world wide, world class Forum - the finds are going to be from all over, and quite excellent. The competition is stiff. Of the 20K + members, probably about 80 -85 % of those people were likely drive by ID requests, who only participate for a short time. Figure we have about 600 -700 regularly participating members. And participation is not mandatory. The onus falls on the entrant to summarize what about their find is unique and special. Plants and ichno fossils have won in the past. But ultimately, no one can make anyone else participate, either by submitting a fossil or voting. And ultimately, no one can guide the parameters used by members to vote. Mike, ... we have to draw the line somewhere. It is a Fossil of the Month contest. The rules are designed to give the best chance of celebrating a fossil that was found that month or that the majority of the prep was finished in the current month of the contest. Would it be fair, say, ... to allow a fossil that was found 12 years ago, that was mostly prepped in the past, but had some small amount of prep done to it in the current month, to be allowed in the contest for this month? Where does it end? There is logic in the rules, as stated,.. I think. It should be possible to get before pics , then, get the after pics sent by the preparator before the piece is shipped back to you. But even then, there is no guarantee that the fossil will win. I have entered fossils that have lost, and I count myself lucky to have been able to submit what I believed were worthy finds. I'm sorry if you feel slighted by this, but, the rules are the rules, and we do have to draw the line somewhere. ******************* Bottom line is - we have great fossils posted here, each and every month, ... and if you are proud of your find, enter it. It's nice to win, but it is equally nice to showcase a prized fossil.
  46. 5 likes
    It looks like a piece of a gorgonian. If you do a forum search with the word gorgonian, you will see a similar one that JohnJ found in the Cretaceous. I find similar ones in the Eocene of North Carolina. Here's a link http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/17990-campanian-marine-mystery/
  47. 5 likes
    Eusaurosphargis dalsassoi: Exceptional Ancient Lizard Fossil Astonishes Scientists The Fossil: Artists' rendering: LINK to Article LINK to Open Access Paper Enjoy!
  48. 5 likes
    I'll throw this in as my first entry for IPFOTM Tealliocaris woodwardi multiblock from the Gullane Formation of the Lower Carboniferous/Mississippian, East Lothian, Scotland found 13/06/17.
  49. 5 likes
    It's an internal mold of a crinoid calyx. Nice fossil!! You can see the little "nipple" where the stem attached to the calyx. Don
  50. 5 likes
    I would say pet. wood or pith cast of calamities.