Search the Community

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/vamp/index.php/VAMP/article/view/29372

Hi everyone ! i need a bit of help . I recently found the mosasaur jaw that i really like and in my budget range so i just want to make sure before buying this 2 . Any repair / restoration ? or any red flag on this 2 jaw pieces ??? Seller said to me that no Repair / restoration on this two jaw . Jaw number 1 Jaw number 2 as always thank you in advance guy ! Regard Guns

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.

Some time ago I came across this seller selling a lot of pliosaur teeth without provenance, most of which can be attributed to misidentified teeth of Zarafasaura oceanis, the elasmosaurid of the Moroccan phosphates. However, amongst these same teeth, I also came across the below few of teeth that I'm having difficulty identifying. Tooth 5 is obviously a mosasaurid tooth from the Ouled Abdoun basin and probably belongs to Eremiasaurus heterodontus; tooth 1 seems to originate in the Kem Kem; and I suspect there are at least a few crocodile teeth amongst the rest (at least tooth 4). But I've grown quite curious to learn the identity and origin of these teeth, so was hoping to find some help here. Hence, this little game. Lets see what information we can compile on them, but no additional photographs will be made available/requested Tooth 1 Tooth 2 Tooth 3 Tooth 4 Tooth 5 To help kickstart the "game", I'll tag at least @caterpillar @Jesuslover340 @LordTrilobite @Praefectus and @Haravex. As always, feel free to tag others, but don't feel obliged to respond Thanks for your help, and have fun with what I think might be a nice little puzzle!

From oued zem maestrichian phosphate bed Moroccan..traded some Carcharodon planus for what I believe or hope is an actual Mosasaurus jaw section Hope someone here can make a stab at what Mosasaurus it may be from.

Ahoi. Another marine tetrapod. To be perfectly clear, This is a commercially bought Model which I changed to my ideas.Like my marine sloth and most of my dino- and other saurian ,models, but not my whales. I ordered the model from geoworld because some of the line had been quite nice. When I first saw it I didn´t think I could make something for my collection out of it. Tried it anyway. Because of the size in my chosen scale of 1/20 I decided to model it on Platecarpus, although I don´t claim to be accurate to even genus level. It´s just the medium sized Mosasaur to go with my whales and other seacritters. The flippers may need further detailwork. But for now I am content with the result. The base is a recent tuna vert by the way. Aloha!

Hi again! I figured since you were all so helpful with the fake trilobite that'd I would show you the mosa tooth I bought from the same seller. How does this look? It hasnt arrived yet so this picture came from the seller. Then as a bonus, this is the trilobite I'm thinking of getting to replace the fake I'm sending back. This one has to be real right?

My main concern, is it composite? What can you tell from these pictures?

Found this thick bone piece in a new jersey cretaceous creek and wonder if its possible to maybe id since one side has a distinct rough texture while the other is flatter and striated, I would guess either large turtle, mosasaur, or dinosaur. My friend joked its a theropod maxilary skull fragment, but we all know around here that material seems close to impossible to come across haha. Interested to hear any other thoughts.

Hi dear forumers. Need you help. May be some of you have a proper experience in printing 3d models of fossils. The great task appeared in my path. I trying to make a paleontology museum in my town. Our family have a more than 20 years of experience in paleohunting an we dream about showing to people what a beautyful and unique ancient creatures have been living here, near our home. And we want to show how interestin is our sciense: paleontology. We have a thousands of fossils of all systems from middle jurassic series, all of cretaceous systems to miocene series, in 300km zone aroun our city. The pearl of our collection: fragment of lower mosasaurus jaw. But not everybody can imagine how great that sea monster was. And in my brain births an idea to print a full scale mosasaurus skull. So may be some of you have such experience and can help me with hints and solutions about this problem. May be you know a proper link. The links that i found in web aren`t free. I haven`t much money, and i scear about resolution of virtual model and quality of printing. Also may be some of you know where to dind a good resolution photo of masasaurus scull. Thanks everybody for help.

Hi everyone! With my 6 years old son we have bought this precious tooth in a prestigious shop at Barcelona. They have tell us that is a Mosasaurus tooth, but I think not. It looks more a Spinosaurus tooth, maybe (sorry if I'm talking absurdity, I'm totally newbie...). The teller at shop was not the usual one, and it was not possible to ask him more information. Please, may you help me to identify the correct "former owner" for this tooth? My son and I will be very grateful for that. I'm posting some photos for the piece. The first one is from the other pieces at shop, that we didn’t bought. The size for rule is in centimeters. Thanks a lot for your kindness!

I was in creek bed and I came across several of these. I think they a mosasaururs am I correct? I was hunting for a couple of hours Saturday and Sunday. I found 15 different verts. busy weekend.

Found it on online. Please tell me these are not fakes?

I bought this Moroccan mosasaurus tooth in matrix some time ago. As you can see, it has a long scrape down the side. When I got it, I assumed it the tooth was damaged when it was discovered or prepared in Morocco. However, I saw a tooth for sale the other day on a website with a similar mark described as "feeding damage." What do you all think? Anyone seen this sort of thing before? Is there any way to tell feeding damage versus a more mundane type of damage?

Hello everyone, I was in Big Brook nj for a little while today and found this interesting bone. I'm not to sure if it's identifiable but it does remind me of a jaw section like a mosasaur or croc. Any help will appreciated, if I missed an angle or need additional pictures do let me know.

Hello all. I bought this very neat large framed fossil a while back and the label says; “Fossil Vertebrae Dinosaur Spinosaurus Or Reptile Mosasaurus” Since I’m puzzled as the dealer was, though I lean Mosasaurus, I’m hoping some of you can help me identify what it is that I have. Personally I’m happy with either, especially considering the crazy deal I got on this specimen. If more images are needed I’ll provide them. Thanks in advance.

Hi everyone, I have the opportunity to enlarge my fossil collection with a mosasaurus skull. However I am still not sure if this one is real or not. The teeth seem real but the skull make me doubt... can someone help me ? best regards Thomas

Here are my new fossils! And how my collection looks now. For size comparison the enchodus tooth to the right in the picture of the entire collection is 5,6cm long (2.2 Inches long)

I ordered 3 Mosasaurus teeth, 1 Crow shark tooth and 1 Enchodus tooth. Do they seem real? And do they have any signs of restoration?

Hello, i am a Student from Germany. I have recieved the Task of analyzing the huge fossil Collection of my School, which includes this tooth. According to a profile (that appears to have been made by a fifth or sixt-grader), it is from Oued-Zem / Khouribgha, morocco. My best guess is that it is from Prognathodon. It is about 2,5 to 3 cm Long and 1 cm thick. Many thanks in Advance!!!

Hi all, Just looking for some advice. Does this matrix look legit? Or has this mosasaur tooth been placed? cheers

Could experts share the primary indicators to check for regarding authenticity of a Mosasaurus jaw specimen? - specifically root / tooth junctures. I’m aware of the sophistication of fakes in the market. Below is a recent purchase - I’d like feedback on details to look for in verifying authenticity. Thank you!

Good Morning everyone, I have a toddler who recently got very much into dinosaurs and fossils which eventually brought back all my childhood afflictions and memories to same. We stopped my a small fossil shop near Austin where we both went crazy with all the variety. Needless to say he got some very nice, small items. I spent quite a lot on a few pieces with the hype and childhood yearn to always have in possession a few Real items. Upon our arrival at home and in closer inspection as well as researching online, I'm not sure if I purchased authentic fossils. PLEASE HELP ME! My first post with is a Megalodon Tooth that he said was fused on a crack. I’ll post some others thereafter.

What mosasaurus is it? I bought it as Globidens phosphaticus but I find the bone is from another kind of Mosasaurus. And the seller stick them together. Can someone tell me what specie does the bone belong to? Thanks. Picture 3 is what it looks like at the begining.

Hello, so I was thinking about buying this piece but i would love it if I could remove the matrix from it to make it look better. Is this possible? Thanks-