Search the Community

Hey all! Im kind of new to fossil hunting, but in the 4 months I've been obsessed with it and have amassed a fair collection of local byrozoans, brachiopods, bivalves, and crinoids. But recently Ive been kind of short of fossil rich places and was wondering if you guys could give me some great locations within like 20ish minutes of Overland Park. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I'm working on a really excellent mosasaur skull right now! I also read a 2014 publication by Johan Lindgren , Michael Caldwell, Takuya Konishi , and Luis Chiappe. In Convergent Evolution in Aquatic Tetrapods: Insights from an Exceptional Fossil Mosasaur they reveal some of the amazing details preserved on the famous Bonner Platecarpus specimen at LACM (LACM 128319) seen here: Like the LACM specimen, my new skull seems to have the same sort of differential phosphatization / preservation (?) of the scale pattern. Here is a figure from the article: Here are a few pictures of the parietal on the skull I am working on now: I promise I will share more pictures as the prep of this specimen continues! Until then, Merry Christmas! -KS

Hello, all! Sorry I haven’t losted in a while. I’ve been busy with college this semester. Anyways, I recently purchased a fossil poplar leaf from my local rock shop! I’m pretty excited to have it on my collection! They say that it is Cretaceous in age, but I’m not sure. Part of me thinks it’s from the Green River Formation and is Eocene in age, but part of me thinks that the leaf is indeed Cretaceous in age. My reasoning for it being Cretaceous in age is because I’ve heard of fantastic leaf fossils come out of Ellsworth County in Kansas. The Ellsworth County area is part of the Dakota Formation, I believe. My question is: What age you think this fossil is add what formation do you think it came from? I tried to take a photo of it with my phone, but the photo came out crappy and I feel that the lighting was bad. I probably take better photos later on if you guys want. I feel like I should’ve also provided a ruler or something for scale, but I’m pretty exhausted. Let me know if you need a scale for figuring out the size of the leaf fossil. Thank you all!

Hoping to ID the central object in this photo. It appears to be broken towards the narrower end. It has grooves running the length of it. It's approximately 1 mm or less in length. Lower Permian, Cottonwood member, Council grove group, Kansas.

I wanted to wait for my "Shop" to be completely done before showing it here. Due to the fact that my oldest child will be graduating high school next month, and my shop will soon be turned in to a graduation party area I have decided to go ahead and show it unfinished. I have always loved science museums, so I decided to just make my own in my own yard. Last summer I put up a 30X50 "pole barn", put in a wood floor and walls, and now I have my own museum. Almost everything in here was collected by myself or my family. This collection is 90% Kansas stuff, but the last photo of the rikers and the glass case is what I call my "exotic" section. All of the stuff there is from other states that I either found myself, or with the aid of fellow Fossil Forum members. (A bunch of my Texas stuff is from the Waco trip that a lot of members went on many years ago.) There is also a prep room with a window (just like all the cool museums) in the corner. Its already a mess, but I hope to keep the mess confined to that area! I still have some work to do, and I doubt it will ever be completely done, but if any of you ever find yourself driving across Kansas I'm only about 20 minutes off of I-70, and if I'm home, you are welcome to stop by. I may even point you to a spot or two where you can find some of your own fossils around here.

In 1958, Louis S. Kornicker and John Imbrie wrote a brief paper on the holothurian sclerites of the Florena Shale in which they described four species. I have found 3 specimens of one of these, Microantyx permiana Kornicker and Imbrie, 1958. Two of these specimens were badly broken, but one is in fair condition. The sclerites are wheel-shaped with short spokes, and the openings between the spokes are roughly triangular. In this dorsal view we can see a distinctive trait of this taxon: the central area has four deep depressions. (The upper one in this view is largely filled with matrix, unfortunately.) The dorsal surface is virtually flat. Individual specimens are typically very close to circular, but this one seems to have a marginal chip that disturbs the symmetry. The ventral surface is slightly cup-shaped, the marginal rim being raised above the level of the spokes. The central area is more strongly raised, producing a central, conical hub. The diameter of Kornicker and Imbrie's specimens ranged from 0.17 - 0.27 mm., the average being 0.23 mm. This specimen is thus somewhat larger than any of theirs. Kornicker, Louis S., and John Imbrie, 1958, "Holothurian Sclerites from the Florena Shale (Permian) of Kansas," Micropaleontology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 93-96, pl. 1.

In this entry I would like to show two of the commonest Foraminifera from my sample of the Florena Shale. The most common forams by far are the fusulinids, but as these are not identifiable without thin sections, they will have to wait until I'm equipped to deal with them. Excepting the fusulinids, the commonest foram is Globivalvulina bulloides (Brady, 1876): This taxon has an enrolled biserial structure, and in spiral view it typically exhibits one large and two smaller chambers, the sutures between them forming a rough T-shape. In the umbilical view the triangular projection into the umbilical area is characteristic. The many specimens show several different growth stages, but all are easily identifiable. The second most common non-fusulinid is Tetrataxis corona Cushman and Waters, 1928: This taxon is looks much like a Chinese straw hat: a very low cone, with a concave umbilical area. Chambers are added marginally, typically four per whorl, hence the generic name. Specimens vary greatly in size, representing various growth stages. The larger ones very frequently exhibit chipped or broken edges, probably due to postmortem damage.

In this second entry I would like to show well-preserved specimens of two ostracodes: the very long-ranging taxon Amphissites centronotus (Ulrich and Bassler, 1906), and the Permian taxon Cornigella parva Kellett, 1933. The former belongs in the family Amphissitidae, while the latter is placed in the family Drepanellidae. This specimen is a relatively late instar, but not fully mature, as final instar specimens average about 50% larger. The species is very easy to recognize, the very large and prominent central node being quite distinctive. Additionally, there are two strong ventral flanges, the inner flange curving upward to the anterior cardinal angle. There is a fairly strong dorsal ridge, the ends curving abruptly downward to form anterior and posterior ridges, the former being the longer of the two. The flanges and ridges are considerably weaker on early instars, but the prominent central node is still unmistakable. So far as I am aware, this taxon occurs throughout the Pennsylvanian (and perhaps earlier), and disappears by mid-Permian time, a range in excess of 100 Ma. It has been assumed that this species was a free-swimming benthic form, as the prominent flanges would not be well-suited to an infaunal mode of life. Betty Kellett described two species of the genus Cornigella from the Fort Riley Limestone of the Chase Group, higher in the Permian section of Kansas: Cornigella parva Kellett 1933, and Cornigella binoda Kellett 1933. They differed in the number of lateral nodes, the former species having a larger number of nodes, while in the latter species only the two prominent dorsal nodes were present. However, Kellett noted that her specimens showed considerable variation, which she attributed to poor preservation and diagenetic crushing. She went so far as to suggest that the two described taxa might actually be the same. Looking at Florena specimens, which are well-preserved complete carapaces, I would agree with her suggestion. The lateral nodes exhibit varying degrees of development; although the two dorsal nodes are always strongly developed, the ventral and anterior nodes may be considerably weaker. The specimen shown here is very well-preserved, and the full (?) complement of lateral nodes is clearly represented. (Note that, since we are looking at a complete carapace, the posterior dorsal node of the right valve is also obvious, as is a hint of the anterior dorsal node.) This specimen is also of interest, in that it shows a lot of the surface sculpturing, not too obvious on other specimens. I have chosen the name C. parva for this taxon, as Kellett's description appears first on the page, and should thus have priority. I have not seen the description or illustrations of the generotype Cornigella minuta Warthin, 1930, which was described as having eight "prominent spines", one projecting well above the hinge line. Type specimens were from the Pennsylvanian Wetumka Formation of Oklahoma. I would follow Kellett's judgement in deciding that the Permian taxon was not conspecific with that of Warthin. I had hoped to illustrate a perfect carapace of Ectodemites pinguis (Ulrich and Bassler, 1906) from the Florena, which I had temporarily stored in a small black plastic tray (the lid of a micromount box) on my desktop. Unfortunately, when I went to retrieve it for photography, it had simply disappeared -- even though I thought it to be well covered! Now it's fodder for the vacuum cleaner, one of the hazards of microfossil collecting................!

I recently received some samples of washed residues from various shales and marls noted for their microfossil content. One of the best of these is from southern Kansas, of Permian (Wolfcampian) age, from the Council Grove Group, Beattie Limestone Formation, Florena Shale Member. The sample is amazingly rich, and I have recovered numerous species of Foraminifera and Ostracoda, as well as many nice bryozoan fragments. In this blog entry I would like to show one of the more interesting microfossils that the Florena Shale is particularly noted for: the oogonia of charophytes, members of the algal family Characeae, commonly known as Stoneworts. These large green algae live in relatively shallow, fresh to brackish waters -- although the tiny oogonia can easily wash down streams to the sea, where they will settle to the bottom in quiet, shallow areas. (An excellent example is provided by The Fleet, a brackish lagoon on the southern coast of Dorset, England, where charophyte oogonia are abundant in bottom samples.) Charophytes have been around for a long time, the earliest known oogonia coming from Devonian shales. This is a relatively large specimen from the Florena Shale, very typical in appearance. The plants are called Stoneworts because they slowly secrete calcium carbonate, which eventually coats the leaves and stems, and particularly the reproductive products, the oogonia. These are quite small, roughly egg-shaped, with a prominent spiral structure due to the shape of strip-like cells which grow to encase the delicate reproductive cells. These strip-like cells vary in number, a valuable taxonomic trait. This taxon, Catillochara moreyi (Peck, 1934), like all late Paleozoic forms, has five spirals. (To count them, one needs to look at the specimen in end view, where the strip-like cells converge to a point, or small pit -- depending on which end one looks at. On this specimen the point is to the right.) Whole specimens like this one are typically white, because we are looking at a relatively thick outer coating of calcium carbonate. Interestingly, the spiral-forming strips are coal black, and are usually well-preserved inside the outer coating. This smaller specimen is broken, and the black spiral "egg case" beneath is readily apparent. Holocene specimens from The Fleet look exactly the same when broken, or when the outer coating has yet to develop. In further entries to this blog I will show off a few of the more interesting ostracodes and forams.

Yesterday the weather was unseasonably nice, and I had a little time while traveling through the flint hills of Kansas to do a little fossil hunting with my youngest daughter. I was hoping to get over to hunt in the KC area, but didn't make it that far. (Sorry Bullsnake) We hunted a small exposure of a grey exposure made almost entirely of fossils. Maily millions of tiny fusulinids. I also found a few plates from spiny urchins, crinoid pieces, brachs, and some other stuff. (I'm very poor on my knowledge of the Permian of Kansas.) Anyways here are a few pictures of our hunt. I find the two things at the bottom of the penny to be kind of exciting. I have no idea what they are, but they look cool! Any help on an ID of these things would be appreciated. Ramo (I also added a cool picture of a small T-Rex I came across here the other day hunting my local cretaceous rocks. I had a nice find that day, but an waiting on some further prep to revel what I brought home that day.)

Ptychodus are my favorite teeth and I recently came across a place that seemed to have an unusual number of them. There are a few with a nice red tint to them that is new to me. I like them very much. However what I really love is a larger(for the site and age) tooth with an extremely worn crown. I have a lot of ptychodus with worn crowns but this tooth just hurts to even look at. He's the guy in the top left. Probably occidentalis. There is just something about seeing a worn tooth that makes a 95 million year old creature seem more real, if that makes sense.

thought at first it was just pieces but as i prep it im finding it goes all the way around and might go all around ib every layer of the rock!!!!!!!!!!! the only weird thing is it shows up clear when its wet but hardly at all when dry any ideas to give it a wet look but have it be dry? ibwas thinking vasaline might work but not sure

forgot i picked this up anyone know if its a shell or a scale/?

Here is a sneak peak of one of my recent discoveries: Protosphyraena perniciosa (swordfish) Smoky Hill Chalk Late Cretaceous Gove County, KS USA I estimate that the fin would have been over 3 feet in length if complete. I'll place it in a square slab and finish it up from there. Should look great. Kris (KansasFossilHunter)

Hey guys, right now I'm out in Western Kansas doing some hunting. I thought I'd share with you a picture of my work today: It was hard to take a picture in the sun. Came in almost one piece cracked on the way to the car but should be easily repairable. Here is the other dent. to this specimen: -Kris (KansasFossilHunter)

Since it's SOOOO cold here in the Midwest and I can't get out, I finally got around to prepping one of the pile of jackets I have in my basement that we've collected in the Niobrara Chalk of Kansas over the years. This is a small Protosphyreana pectoral fin. It's just over a foot long. (We have others that are over 3 feet long.) Protosphyreana is a swordfish-type critter that is mostly known from its serrated pectoral fins and its rostrum. This specimen was collected in 2002. The tip is missing as that was what was weathering out. A bonus was the scapulo-coracoid (shoulder girdle) was associated with the fin as well as a skull fragment. I neglected to take photos at the beginning of the process, so what I didn't document was the removal of the rock covering the fossil and the cutting down of the jacket. What is documented is the cut down jacket with plaster poured around it to make a rectangular display. The tip is reconstructed with plaster and painted to match the bone. Finally, the plaster is "painted" with dissolved chalk that makes it look like it's a piece of chalk rather than plaster. http://oceansofkansas.com/Protosphyr.html

Hey everyone, I found this little jaw last Summer in the Lincoln Limestone, Greenhorn Formation, late Cretaceous in Kansas. After reading some information forwarded by Ramo about Coniasaurus and how they are fairly common in the Lincoln Limestone I was wondering if I might have found a partial jaw. I am completely unfamiliar with Coniasaurus and really don't know. I just thought it looked very similar and un-fish like given the shape of the teeth (or roots). Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Jamie PS. There is micro shark tooth just below the jaw. Probably unrelated, but I like to think it's from a little guy nibbling on the carcass.

Today I went to lawrence to look for fossils in the heebner shale and found some fossils but a few i dont know what they are. I heard about conodont fossils there but thats about it. If you know what they are then please reply. Thanks Here it is again with measurement