Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'char'.
-
As the title states, I have a few questions regarding the burn test. We hunt glacial deposits in eastern Kansas, and find many bones, some obviously not fossil (we chuck these) and some that are definitely fossil. I do understand that the river tends to darken bones, and give the appearance of fossil. However, we have found several bones that have the right color to be fossil, are exceptionally heavy for their size, and 'feel' right to be a fossil. Strangely though, when I do the burn test on them, they will not char or burn but give off a more subtle 'burnt hair' smell. Of course, on definite non-fossil bones, they smell badly and tend to usually char/burn. SO, my question: Is the burn test a definite decider on whether a bone is fossil or not? I have heard of Bison Latifrons bones not passing the burn test, yet they are without question 'fossils'. Also, I know it doesn't really apply to this, but I have also heard of collagen being preserved even in dinosaur bones; at least in small amounts. Could some collagen be preserved in some of our bones? So, is the burn test definitive? Or should I toss bones that char and burn, but ones that smell but do not burn, keep? Hopefully y'all understand what I'm getting at here. Thank you so much in advance
-
I am trying to find information of how fish populations changed in the central USA/Great Lakes region in the last 100,000 years or so and am drawing blanks When did walleye/ Sander vitreus appear and where did it come from?. The same goes for brook trout/ Salvelinus fontinalis. Are there any good collections of fossils through the various periods of glaciation? Are there any regions where these neogene/quatrenary fish fossils are being uncovered? Where is there a literature on the subject?
- 8 replies
-
- 1
-
- char
- great lakes
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with: