Search the Community

This piece of spine with 4 verts was found in the fosfat beds of Morocco. It is supposed to be Plesiosaur, but the form is different I think. Might be Mosasaur, although I have never seen these trianglar shaped studs on the sides of the vertebrae. Does anyone recognize the shape? The whole piece is appx 40cm long and a good 20 cm wide.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0195667121001294 https://www.nicklongrich.com/blog/pluridens-and-the-insane-incredible-neverending-diversity-of-moroccan-mosasaurs @jnoun11 @pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon

I have been reading up on Moroccan mosasaurs and one point of confusion that I have run into is differentiating teeth from Prognathodon anceps and Prognathodon giganteus. There seems to be a great deal of overlap in their descriptions and occasional contradictions in the scientific literature. The first issue I’ve noticed is that there seems to be a great deal of confusion over what to even call the two species. Leiodon anceps (Owen, 1841-1845) was based on two tooth fragments and a section of jawbone. The genus was renamed Liodon by Agassiz (1846) because the name Leiodon was preoccupied by the pufferfish Leiodon Swainson, 1839. E.D. Cope (1869-1870) caused confusion by treating Liodon as synonymous with Tylosaurus. Further confusion was caused when the holotype material of Liodon was lost. This has resulted in authors suggesting that the Liodon is nomen dubium and all species under Liodon should be transferred to Prognathodon (Schulp et al. 2008). With regards to Moroccan specimens, Arambourg (1952) identifies prognathodontid teeth as ‘Mosasaurus’ cf. anceps. The smaller specimens identified by Arambourg have since been reclassified as teeth from Eremiasaurus heterodontus (Leblanc et al., 2012) and the larger teeth have been tentatively assigned to ‘Prognathodon anceps’. More recently, Bardet et al. 2015 suggested that the Moroccan ‘Prognathodon anceps’ may actually represent a unique species, separate from the poorly defined European M. (Leiodon) cf. anceps. Prognathodon giganteus Dollo, 1904 (holotype IRScNB R106 / formerly 3103) was defined based on an incomplete skull and postcranial skeleton from the upper Campanian of the Ciply area, southern Belgium. Note that early mosasaurs, Lacerta gigantea and Mosasaurus giganteus both share a similar specific epithet to Prognathodon giganteus but are actually both junior synonyms of Mosasaurus hoffmannii. For simplicity, I’m going to just refer to the two as Prognathodon anceps and Prognathodon giganteus. In a recent thread, @pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon made an informative post about the two prognathodontids. I have copied it below for context. Begin Quote …This is certainly another pair of nice teeth, even if they both belong to the most common prognathodontid species found in Morocco! I'd call them both P. giganteus from my experience, although the morphology of the top-most/first tooth conforms more with Bardet et al. (2014)'s Prognathodon nov. sp., which seems to correspond most to P. anceps as defined here. However, this is where I get confused between these two prognathodontid species, as the teeth of both species seem very similar morphologically (see below images): Prognathodon (Mosasaurus) cf. anceps sensu Arambourg, figure 8 from Machalski et al., 2003. Campanian and Maastrichtian mosasaurid reptiles from central Poland (some beautiful images of M. hoffmanni teeth in this publication too, @Praefectus) (Leiodon) cf. anceps, plate XXXVIII from Arambourg, 1952. Les vertébrés fossiles des gisements de phosphates (Maroc - Algérie - Tunisie) Prognathodon giganteus, figure 40 from Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1989. The mosasaur Prognathodon (Reptilia, Mosasauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous of Belgium Amarabourg (ibid., p. 280-281) describes the teeth of Mosasaurus cf. anceps as follows: Or, translated (mine): Machalski et al. (ibid., p. 404-405) summarize this by stating In comparison, Lingham-Soliar & Nolf (ibid., p. 166-167) describe the teeth of Prognathodon giganteus as follows: Overall, reading over all the slight differences in termonology used, the descriptions and images given for the teeth of both P. giganteus and P. anceps seem rather similar. However, Arambourg's definition of 'Mosasaurus' cf. anceps dates to 1952, whereas Dollo defined his P. giganteus in 1904. This would seem to suggest that P. giganteus might be the senior synonym. As Arambourg based his definition on Owen's 1841 description of Leiodon anceps, this seniority may be misleading, however, with P. anceps actually being the senior. Another reason to may be given more credence to the naming of P. anceps is that, according to Wikipedia "Prognathodon giganteus, named by Dollo in 1904, is one of species with the most brief descriptions, apparently only intended to provide a name for the skeleton of the mosasaur for exhibition in the museum hall". To my knowledge, the two prognathodontid species haven't ever been synonymized, however. Quote from this thread: End Quote Below are some additional pictures and academic quotations relevant to the topic. This is the holotype skull of Prognathodon giganteus and a hypothetical sketch from Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1990. Compare to some Prognathodon anceps skull reconstructions originating from Morocco. As far as descriptions of teeth go, Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002 describe Prognathodon giganteus in Jordan (NOT Morocco) as: They include the following picture: Cappetta et al. 2014 described Prognathodon teeth from the Gantour basin as the following. Note that Prognathodon anceps is referred to as Prognathodon nov. sp. in this publication. Bardet et al. 2015’s review of mosasaurid teeth differentiated Prognathodon teeth by the following. E is Prognathodon giganteus. F is Prognathodon anceps. In my opinion, these teeth look like they come from the same mosasaur, but different parts of the jaw. To summarize: Character Prognathodon anceps Prognathodon giganteus Size Anterior teeth less stocky than lateral teeth (Arambourg, 1952) Teeth robust, large cones (Bardet et al. 2015) Large and robust in appearance (Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002) The teeth appear to be more or less uniform in size along most of the jaw ramus although this assessment is an inference based on an incomplete number of preserved teeth and tooth bases of the maxillae and dentaries. (Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1992) Recurve Anterior teeth recurve posteriorly. Lateral teeth recurve posteriorly and slightly medially (Arambourg, 1952; Machalski et al. 2002) Somewhat posteriorly recurved tips (Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1992) Cross-section Anterior teeth cross-section, almost circular at the neck, becomes somewhat oval and irregular towards the apex. Lateral teeth are compressed with an elliptical symmetrical cross-section (Arambourg, 1952; Machalski et al. 2002; Bardet et al. 2015) In horizontal cross-section the tooth is subcircular and bears a close resemblance to Williston's (1897) cross-section of a tooth of P. overtoni (Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1992, Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002) Carinae Possess anterior and posterior carinae (Arambourg, 1952; Machalski et al., 2003) They are bicarinate with subequal buccal and lingual surfaces (Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1992, Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002) Labial (buccal) and lingual surfaces Labial and lingual surfaces, both of which are strongly convex (Arambourg, 1952; Machalski et al. 2002) Subequal convex labial and lingual faces (Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002) Serrations (crenulations) They bear finely crenellated cutting edges that extend the full apicobasal height, both symphyseally and commissurally (Arambourg, 1952; Machalski et al., 2003) The carinae are strongly marked and pinched from the main shaft with less visible serrations (Bardet et al., 2015) Surface features Facetting is not well developed but is more clearly seen on the lingual surface. Enamel beading is present, but poorly developed (Machalski et al., 2002) Some teeth bear indistinct facets on the lingual surface (Bardet et al., 2015) Tooth surfaces are enameled and appear to be covered in very fine vertical striae. This may on the other hand be an artifact of preservation caused by cracking of the enamel. Russell (1970, p. 374) on the other hand describes the enamel in P. giganteus as smooth but he may have based his statement on Dollo's (1904, p. 213) brief comment to that effect. Kues et al. (1985) also mention fine anastomosing striae in teeth which, however, are questionably referred to Prognathodon. (Lingham-Soliar & Nolf, 1992) Anastomosing enamel especially prevalent on the blunt apical region (Bardet and Pereda Suberbiola, 2002) Pinched/unpinched carinae Their two carinae are strongly detached (Arambourg, 1952) Tooth crowns without pinched carinae (Cappetta et al. 2014) The carinae are strongly marked and pinched from the main shaft with less visible serrations (Bardet et al 2015) ***Note the contradiction Apex Higher sharper apex (Bardet et al., 2015) Blunt apex (Cappetta et al. 2014, Bardet et al 2015) Based on all this, I think the defining differences the researchers are pointing are: (1) P. anceps teeth are more laterally compressed than P. giganteus (2) P. anceps teeth have “pinched” carinae while P. giganteus have unpinched carinae (3) P. anceps teeth have a pointed apex while P. giganteus has a blunt apex (4) P. anceps teeth are less posteriorly recurved than P. giganteus teeth I’m not quite sure what to conclude. These features seem like they may fall within heterodonty or individual, ontogenetic, and sexual variation. Whether the two species can be differentiated based on cranial and postcranial elements is yet to be seen. I have not seen any attempts to synonymize the species. In my opinion, I don't think the two species are understood well enough to differentiate the them based solely on isolated teeth. I would like to hear what others have to say on the topic.

I got this fossil shark vertebra for free. It was filled with matrix on it so i prepped it. Its from the Oulad Abdoun Basin, Morocco near Khouribga. The location has fossils from the Cretaceous-Eocene. Does anyone know the species/genus or age of this shark vert?

Hello, any thoughts on this? It is sold as pterosaur remains--jaw pieces and a vertebra, from Ouled Abdoun Basin, Morocco. From the Cretaceous--unfortunately from an old German collection, so the information is limited. 240mm x 105mm Now, I think it is misidentified and is actually a bird--possibly Dasornis because on the first pic, the jaw has a long tooth and then a few of the smaller mini "teeth" which matches a drawing I found in a paper of similar birds, which I've also attached. If it's Dasornis or a bird, then that would mean it isn't Cretaceous in age? The preservation seems odd to me though---Most bird fossils I see from Ouled Abdoun, the bones are much lighter in color. Any thoughts would be great. Thanks

Hi everyone, I have some trilobites I need help with identification on. I acquired these several years ago, so I am not entirely sure where these trilobites were found and can only suspect. The first is a trilobite that I believe is from Morocco. It is around 6 cm in length and 3 cm in width. The other two are Agnostid trilobites that I believe are from Utah. I was wondering if it was possible to limit each down to a genus. The darker one is 6 mm in length with a thorax around 3 mm wide. The lighter one is 7 mm in length with a thorax around 3.5 mm wide. Any help is appreciated. Thanks! IMG_5098.HEIC IMG_5100.HEIC IMG_5102.HEIC IMG_5104.HEIC IMG_5108.HEIC IMG_5109 2.HEIC IMG_5111.HEIC Whoops! I just realized I attached the first trilobite's images as files instead. I'll try to upload them as images instead in a reply.

Hello, I saw this for sale, wondering people's thoughts. It is from the Atlas Mountains in Morocco--seller has it listed as Jurassic. The striated side makes me hopeful this is a Pliosaur tooth rather than Plesiosaur, which all seem to be smoothe from Morocco. Atlas Mountains formation overlaps with Kem Kem I think, so could it be cretaceous as opposed to Jurassic? Thanks for the help

Hi, I always struggle to tell the difference between a Plesiosaur tooth and an Ichthyosaur tooth. This tooth comes from Goulmima in Morocco (lower Turonian) so I believe it is a Plesiosaur tooth (possibly a Pliosaur tooth), but wanted to confirm it here. The tooth is 4.2cm in length and retains the ridges on the tooth which I think is how you might tell the difference between Plesiosaur and Ichthyosaur. Thank you!

This was the first fossil I ever bought, I wasn’t even in kindergarten. I didn’t know what a trilobite was at the time but thought it looked cool. The only info I have is that it’s from Morocco. My best guess is something in the family Calymenidae.

Hello, I have been going through some fossils that I bought a while back. I came across this agatized snail from Morocco. I’ve tried to find more information on these agatized snails, but have been unable to find much. Some sellers online say that they come from Assa, Morocco, while others say they come from the Dakhla region. I’m also wondering what species this little guy belongs to, and a more precise age for these gastropods, although I’m pretty sure they are Eocene. Does anyone have any information regarding these agatized snails?

I need a few more Cretoxyrhina for the display I’m trying to finish. I really do not want to spend money so I’m trying a trade. I recently got some rare Kem Kem Lamniformes teeth and can offer up a Leptostyrax. It is the largest of those I got at 2.6 cm. There is some matrix on the root but the tooth is in pretty good shape. I would consider teeth from any location but my preference would be a location I don’t have such as New Mexico or Alabama. PM me if you’re interested

Hi. Still waiting to get out and hunt. In the meantime I threw this together. It was inspired by other displays I saw on the forum. Enjoy for now can’t wait to be in a creek!

I bought these brachiopods last week, and would really like to remove this matrix. I also have more than two Brachiopods that need cleaned, I just thought I wouldn't need to take pictures of all of them. I would appreciate any help that you can give me, thanks in advance.

I bought this from very trusted sellers. And its pourus or if thats how you spell it. A little piece of it came off. Can i glue it with cyanorylate? (The fossil is from khouribga)this is where the piece came off

Hello everyone,I've decided to open a chain of comments focusing on a popular theme: Moroccan spinosaurids. This is the first comment of a small series dedicated to analyse and document the diverse morphology of spinosaurids in the Kem Kem group. As an introduction,I'll be specifying how it will work,the rules and some guidance for those interested. First and foremost,the rules: 1)For correct identifications,I require images in various view(ventral and lateral at least) and with the highest quality possible. 2)Each comment will focuse on a specific morphotype,as such,only post images of specimens matching the description giving at the start. Any specimen from other morphotype won't be identified by me. 3)Other people are encouraged to post their specimens and help with the identification/s. Procedures: 1) A new comment will be posted each week, probably during the weekend,hour from Spain. 2) Around 4 specific comments are planed. 3) Each comment will discuss a specific morphotype (anterior cervicals,mid cervicals, posterior cervicals and cervicodorsal vertebrae). 4)At the start of each comment,I'll write a basic description of the respective morphology. 5) I'll describe in detail each vertebra contained in the four groups previously mentioned. 6) Images will be extracted/modified from the literature and complemented with additional specimens. 7) Concluding remarks: Taxonomic identification and limitations of the analysis. 8) References and acknowledgements will be posted after the main corpus of the comment is finished. For any questions, please comment below. My words might not be entirely clear.I encourage everyone to post their questions.

I bought this tooth and I am not sure if the root is genuine @Troodon

Hello everyone, I am trying to identify a dinosaur vertebra that comes from the KemKem basins in Morocco. Can you help me ?

Hello everybody: I recently got this nice specimen of Ammonita from Northern Morocco. I am not so sure about the identity, but my guess is that is Hildoceras sp. I wonder if anyone might be inclined to help me to get a proper identification. The person who got it, back in 1995, told me that the specimen is from the Jurassic, but he was not able to provide me a specific name. Perhaps Hildoceras laticosta? Thank you in advance, Best regards, Benifossil2021

I recently picked up 5 Lamniformes teeth from the Kem Kem Beds. 3 are easy ID’s, Leptostyrax. There are 2 that I need a little help with. First one is 2.1 cm. I know both Cenocarcharias and Haimirichia are known from the Kem Kem beds. I have no examples of either in my collection. I didn’t find a lot of examples of Haimirichia so I can really pin it down.

I'm making a collection of fossils from khouribga morocco and im buying from multiple sellers. But the problem is they have different information. So like some say its from khouribga, Oulad abdoun basin, Oud zem, Gebirge. So lm not sure what location to write down. And then age some say cretaceous, Eocene, Paleocene are all these ages in the same locaiton/basin? And if so how do i know?

I need help. WHAT IS THIS? It is being sold as a Moroccan mosasaur tooth and jaw section. I suspect the jaw part probably comes from the phosphates and is genuine mosasaur, but is the tooth, spinosaurid? If this is a fake, it is a much higher quality fake than normal. The change in texture at the base of the crown is suspicious, though. I’d like to hear some of your opinions. Thanks.

Just bought these little beauties. Were sold as 'dromaeosauridae sp.' finger bones. Ad also named them deltadromeus. Now, I'm aware of the difficulties with ID'ing Kem Kem theropod but I like buying cheap-ish fossils and then trying to figure out what they really are. Part of the fun I guess. Total length of both bones is ~63mm. Not sure if the arrangement is correct, bones seem to fit well. They're small, which makes me wonder if they're theropod at all. Did look into deltadromeus, found the gualicho shinyae which might be the best reference point it seems. Bones do look like some of the gualicho material, but more like the feet and not hands. Then again: you'd expect bigger bones for dinosaur, unless these are juvenile I guess. There are some minor repairs on the smaller bone. Nothing too crazy. So I'm hoping you guys can help out, as always! Am I looking at (juvenile?) theropod bones with a likeliness of being deltadromeus (as advertised) or at something completely else?

Hi all- I am doing some cataloging of fossils here at the office. This came is as a donation a while back and I need help IDing it. They were purchased with no info. These trilobites were in a nodule of sorts. I have seen this sort of preservation from Morocco and Bolivia and maybe Peru. Can anyone help me with genus and country of origin? The photo with my hand in it shows the outside of the nodule, if that helps. Thanks JP