Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'fossil identification'.
-
Stupid question #436 My 19th century books don't tell what scale they are using on their bars cm or mm typically?
-
Hellow everyone new to the forum. What I have found looks like a fossilized gastropod sea shell which was found from the gulf of kutch (65-2mya) late cretaceous-tertiary and it was found on the beach. Here is a photo from a local fossil park for comparison.
-
Found this while rockhounding pilgrim haven beach this weekend in southwestern Michigan to get anything not picked over during this years season when I came upon this. I have truly no idea what this could be, it looks like a fish to me but would there be any nice fossils this late in the season? And if so could it even be a fish? I thought we had corals, crinoids, bivalves, etc fossilized but this does not seem to be those.
-
I found this shark tooth in a shell pit near Orlando Florida. Was hoping someone could help identify it, and possibly an estimated age. This is my first large and perfectly intact tooth, so I'm pretty excited to find out what it belonged too.
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- fossil identification
- teeth
- (and 1 more)
-
Found on beach in North Florida. About 5x1.5 millimeters. Shiny bits on the front and back. Not sure what it is?
-
Found on North Florida beach. About 25 x 15 millimeters.
-
Found on North Florida beach. About 15 x 15 mm. Guessing maybe a bone from a reptile or amphibian.
-
Found on a north Florida beach. About 15 x 15 millimeters.
-
Found on North Florida beach. About 10 x 7.5 millimeters.
- 7 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- fossil identification
- florida
- (and 4 more)
-
Found on North Florida beach. About 35 x 15 millimeters.
-
Found on north Florida beach. About 20 x 15 millimeters. Has two holes on either side and two in the back underneath.
-
About 20 x 15 millimeters. Found on North Florida beach.
-
Found on beach in North Florida. About 80 x 20 mm.
-
Found on North Florida Beach. 70 x 40 mm
-
Found on beach in North Florida. About 5x1.5 millimeters. Don’t know what it is yet.
-
A nice favosite but I'm not entirely sure what the other one is if anyone could help me out
MeAmLikeRocks posted a topic in Fossil ID
I got this at a beach in petoskey same as my last post and I'm fairly certain these are two corals, a favosite and one other that I'm not sure of. -
Fossil forum, I recently found an interesting fossil. I was thinking coral or bryozoan, but was unable to identify it correctly. It is from the Leighton Fm Maine (again), which is Silurian. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Here are some pictures of it:
- 8 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- maine
- leighton formation
- (and 4 more)
-
I found this at the bottom of a dry river in the woods in Tennessee. Anybody have any idea what this could be?
-
The brachiopod fauna of the Leighton Formation is so small that I don't often find one that needs some help with identification. This individual does. The closest brachiopod that has the same characteristics is Eoplectodonta (=Plectambonites) transversalis, but it only occurs in the Dennys Formation. The Dennys Fm has quite a different fauna from the Leighton, but it is the closest thing I could find. My other option was some sort of small spiriferid. I will have to defer to @Tidgy's Dad for this one. Below are two pictures of it, first of the cast, and second of the external mold
- 3 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- maine fossils
- pridoli
- (and 5 more)
-
Well, it has been a while since a post on the Silurian Leighton Fm. Had to make a trip due to family matters, and once I got back had a lot of work to do. I finally got into a position to start splitting and prepping more shale, and found this new little guy. I am torn between an operculum of a gastropod, and an inarticulate brachiopod. My main argument for an operculum is because of the shape - the only inarticulate brachiopods in this formation are Orbiculoidea and Pholidops. Unfortunately, I cannot find any reliable papers on the brachiopod Pholidops, it looks very similar but
- 4 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- fossil identification
- maine fossils
- (and 8 more)
-
I have just found this little coprolite? yesterday. This is the second time a coprolite-like fossil has turned up in the shale from the Leighton Fm. I am not really sure on this one, though, due to the presence of crinoid stems. The fossil(s) are from the Leighton Formation, Maine; which is Pridoli, Silurian. The main reason I think it is a coprolite is because of its situation in the shale. The rest of the shale around it is relatively uniform, with no fossils whatsoever. The fossils present in it are one crinoid stem, quite a few ostracods, a very small Orbiculoidea brachiopod,
-
So, I have been preparing this nice little gastropod. I have seen five other specimens that shared the same characteristics, but, unfortunately, some of them did not make it. Before I continued to prep this one, I was wondering if it is possible to roughly ID this gastropod. It would greatly facilitate prep work to have a good idea of its shape. All the specimens I have seen have had three whorls. The upper two whorl's ridges are almost absent, this has been consistent through all my specimens. The shape of the shell is coeloconoid. It was found in the Leighton Formati
-
I am unsure on the identification of this brachiopod. It is from the Leighton Formation, Maine; which is Silurian, Pridoli. According to Maine's Paleozoic Record (an excellent book that lists all the fauna and flora found in formations across Maine), there are only two Rhynchonellid genera in this formation, Camarotoechia and Rhynchotrema. It does not look like a Camarotoechia, but I cannot find many references for the internal mold of Rhynchotrema brachiopods. I would appreciate any references you have on this genus, as well as any advice on the identification of it (@Tidgy's Dad
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- fossil references
- fossil identification
- (and 7 more)
-
I seen this boulder one day driving down my gravel road & threw my back out getting this bad dude in the truck by myself. Probably weighs a couple hundred pounds or more. It's approximately 2'x2'x2'. I seen the formations barely sticking up above the surface & curiosity got the best of me. I figured if it wasn't anything of interest or value I'd at least get some hands on training in prepping a fossil & the painstaking process involved with exposing it. So can anybody tell from the pics if there's any reason to keep etching away at this bad dude? Also what are these formations
-
I have just found this microfossil. It is unfortunately incomplete, but the general shape is still discernible. I have two ideas for this specimen, a fish scale or an inarticulate brachiopod. Of these possibilities, I think that inarticulate brachiopod is more probable. The shape, "growth rings", and slight depression in the top lead me to this conclusion. On the other hand, its size, color, and the absence of such brachiopods from this formation, lead me towards fish scale. I am uncertain on both, and could use some help with this one. The specimen is the from the Leighton Formati
