Search the Community

Hi all, I'm on vacation about 8 miles east of Galena Illinois. I was going to wait until I got home to post a travel piece. I'm too excited to wait, though. I had reached out to a few rock/fossil clubs asking whether there are any known collecting sites around here, and nobody knew of any. There's a road-cut near where I'm staying, and I found what I think is a maclurites fossil! It's not in the best condition, but not bad for about 450-million years old! From what I can tell, the exposed rock around here is in the Galena Group (Trenton Limestone). One app says the stratigraphic unit is the Millbrig k-Bentonite bed. Well, here are some pics, and I hope to post more when I get home and get settled. (The fossil was exposed, and I've done no prepping beyond some light brushing off of dirt.) The domed side: The flat side "Face-on" view I researched this fossil on TFF and saw that it is a favorite of @Bev

Sorry for all the posts, but I'm trying to post some of the bizarre/unidentified pieces from my big brook fossil collection. Here is the best example of a fossil I've found a few of over the years. I assume it's some type of shelled cephalopod, but I have no idea what. Once again going to call @Trevor for his help, and hope I'm not being rude in doing so!

Calling this a Picasso pebble, it's like a tiny work of art and I have no idea how to refer to this type of fossilization but it's very cool. Anyway, really curious what the two columns are that appear to be joined, the gravels it came from are mostly Eagle Ford but include QAL, a little Woodbine, and older.

Hello guys! That was outside of my plans to search in such direction, however a small comment started a big discussion about the possibility to have magma melting the rocks and sealing some fossils. In fact what I was suggesting as simple "melting" seems to be a very complex process or group of processes, that I would suggest to discuss here. So it was already commented, that magma can't really melt other rocks. The temperature of magma is not high enough and it will cool down . Still we see many effects of the magma on the rocks and especially on the sediments and fossils. Here I will try to explain some, so let try to discuss it in the best scientific way . First of all - we talk for underwater sediments. Most likely the intrusion of magma happened when there was still water on the surfice. The main difference between LAVA and MAGMA - these are both the same, however the lava is a magma, that reach the surface and errupt as volcanic activity. But we don't discuss such lava. Most of the time we will see some effects of the magma, intruding near the surface . 1. First effect of the magma - high temperature. Because of the high temperature - the sediments where magma is intruding will be heated. In fact we may not see real melting of these sediments, but because of the high temperature - it will cause these sediments to undergo termal processing which is similar to ceramic production. The water will evaporate. And the clay will harden into very solid hard matterial. 2. The effect of the pressure . Because the magma will erupt from the lower layers - it is under high pressure there. If there is way to the survice it will cause volcanic erruption. It the pressure is not high enough or no such way, the molten magma will try to find any possible space and will fill it. Together with the high temperature - the magma will burn some organic materials and will fill its space. So we may see the exact copy / matrix/ of the organic material but filled and formed by the magma. 3. Chemical processes. Some minerals from the magma may reacct with water or dissolve under hither temperature with water and this may create some kind of magmatic liquid - which would be boiling water with all kind of chemical elements in it. This water may fill the gaps on the bottom, it will be heavier than the normal water and it may create a layer of sediment. 4. The evaporation of water. This is only for a case if water layer is very low and high temperature from underground to evaporate the water, causing all the sediments to form a solid crust. 5. Effects of gases. 6. Cracks - usually the magma will come near the surface through the cracks, so we can see the magma or some products created by magma to fill the cracks in the rocks. The color of such magma or magmatic liquid substances is usually red-brown or black. With all the mention here possibilities I will try to provide some examples of rocks and fossils that I found and to give some explanation, but I should tell that I am not a chemist, I am not geologist. So my explanations are weak. There should be better explanations by the specialists in this field. What is very clear for me: For some very specific rocks and fossils - I may suspect or I recognize some effects of the magma . These are not difficult to recognize. There are many hints to suggest such magmatic activity . I fully understand this is a complex problem and I don't have the background to do such scientific research, I would like to share some observations and to discuss with other participants about such effects and fossil affected by magma actions. First , I will give some examples of rocks, affected by the magma.

Hello again guys! This specimen is more special. Initially I took it because I saw a nautiloid in it. Totay I found there is also a trilobite inside it. Then I started to suspect if the Nautiloid part is not also the same trilobite. It is the same layer as yesterday, same place. Probably middle - late Ordovician. Found near boul. DesSources, on the shore of the river between Laval and Montreal. #1 #2 #3

Hello guys! Today I visited antother place between Montreal/ Laval, on the North shore of Montreal. Spectacular place, many fossils. But the mostly found is a nautiloid/ cephalopod. I've seen such speciments already, however on this place there were so many of them, can't compare it with other places that I visited. In addition, other specimens before were spread out of their original position. Here I have all in one place, the original place . all specimens #1, #2 , #3 N3 #4

A bunch of Paleozoic shells in a rock I found in Dane county, Wisconsin. I know It’s almost impossible to get a genus ID on any of these fossils without a specific quarry or site but I thought it would be cool if you guys could see them. I also have them posted on my gallery

I found this stone with some unknow pattern in the Kalvsjøen formation, Oslo field (late Katian, in late Ordovicium). Can it be two nautiloids or alge? It is some small gastropods there too. The length of the longest "nautiloid" is about 7 cm.

Fossil forum, This is another fossil from the Leighton formation. It is a completely undamaged orthocone nautiloid. I think it is the same species that I showed earlier in the possible fossil coral post, but I am not sure. The external mold has the same grooves, but the internal mold is divided into two sides, each with bumps. Is this normal for a nautiloid fossil? Any help would be appreciated. Here are some pictures of it (internal mold on the left, external mold on the right):

Fossil forum, Good morning. I recently found an interesting fossil invertebrate. It was found at the Leighton formation, Maine. I was thinking possible coral, but the segments on it were perplexing. Trilobite didn't seem to fit because of the size and the shape of the segments. Any help would be appreciated. Here are some pictures of it (the internal mold is on the left, external on the right):

Does anyone have any idea what time period this nautiloid comes from or maybe its genus?

I found this partial nautiloid at Jacksboro. Finis Shale member, Graham Formation, Pennsylvanian. The odd part is how deep the umbilicus is. There was just enough of it to see a piece of intact inner whorl for the profile and some septa to know about how much bigger it could have been if an adult. There was also a piece of the flank broken back with tubercles. I made the clay model of what it might have looked like whole but left off most of the tubercles. I will add photos comparing it to a Metacoceras fragment of about the same diameter that shows the depth from the flank to the previous whorl being about twice as wide.

Greeting my friends , can you help me with this , i went to jubaila city outside of Riyadh , the area is Kimmeridgian ,and found ++++ brocken pieces of Nautiloid shell , it was a surface find , is it a nautilus rhyncholites ???

Hey all. I have a19 inch diameter Nautiloid I am trying to display. I was thinking of something like a plate stand like my wife has holding her very large plates. Problem is this nautiloid weighs close to 25 or so pounds. Yea, I drug that thing out of NSR. Any ideas on where to find a good display option. As also, thank you in advance for any feedback.

The weather is exceptional in southern Ontario, these days. 25 degrees C! That’s 77 degrees Fahrenheit to my US friends and for here in November it is exceptional! We decided it was a great day to go to Big Bay which is situated on Georgian Bay between the Owen Sound and Colpoys Bay a beautiful place down a gravel road; it can be busy in the summer but we knew today it would be quiet. The trip was purposeful because I know it is just full of water washed fossils and I wanted to post pictures of what is there. I wanted to show you all how prolific the Silurian Ocean was. I also included a couple of photos of the beach it’s self. Hope you all enjoy.

Hello all, I don't know much about cephalopods and really could use your help. I found this small rock with the tiny nautiloid specimen in the banks of the Rock River in Ogle county, Illinois. The area's bedrock is Middle Ordovician (Mohawkian, Ancell Group). I believe it belongs to the order of the Actinoceridae. The "camerae" end in double pointed arches instead of a straight edge, just as Wikpedia's illustration shows in the 2nd pic below. What seems to be unusual in my specimen - can't find any photos of this anywhere - are the rounded camerae, vs the tightly lined-up straight banding on other specimens. (I'm not sure about the correct terminology...sorry). If I'm not totally off base, is there a chance to narrow down the ID further? Thanks in advance. General form of Actinocerid:

Timer period: Pennsylvanian Location: Missouri Formation: Not exactly sure. Found in an abandoned rock pile containing limestone from the Iola Limestone Still it is a possibility it came from limestone from the Upper Winterset limestone. Hello! I found this nautiloid a long time ago and it was too heavy for me to carry the chunk of limestone that contained it, but before I left I got a few pictures of the specimen! Once I observed the photo a few weeks later I had the biggest regret of my life as it might contain an impression of soft tissue! I don't know If my mind is playing tricks on me but I think it might contain soft tissue. The thought is driving me crazy since I am always doubtful when I find fossils like these and due to my own lack of experience. Can anyone confirm if it does contain soft tissue? Is this a tentacle? or my imagination? Here are photos I edited in photoshop in order to see if I can make the features more visible (Above) Added more saturation and darkened (above) Added saturation and brightened the image I would like to note I have returned to the area but I have had no luck in finding it again and these are the clearest images I could obtain and I apologize for the blurriness Here are the images in their natural file size and some additional images: https://imgur.com/a/80wzODc If possible I would also love to know its species but I find that unlikely since it is bisected and poorly preserved shell wise.

In my last fossil hunting trip to a late ordovician site in the Oslo field I found these 2 fossils. One with a small spiral form, size 1 cm in diameter, seems to be a gastropod, and the bigger one what seems to be a nautiloid with an unusual form, size about 7-8 cm long. Anyone seen something like these before? First the small gastropod or maybe it is a nautiloid too? A small part fell of, so one can see if it has a sihuncle or not, I took these photos of it with a microscope, the first most clear in the cross section: And here is the bigger nautiloid, with the (for me) unusual form:

I found a nice Discoceras yesterday. A part of it is unfortunately destoyed by a vehicle. The stone is too big so I left it in the field. It is more difficult to take it out of the stone then with ammonites I guess. I also found this second speciemen which I do not know which family it is. Anyone have an idea? Size of the Discoceras is about 15cm in diameter, while the send is 5 cm long.

I posted a picture 2 weeks ago of a fossil which it was disagreement about what it is. In the same stone I found several fossils which have the same or similar forms. I therefore ask again for opinions. First the same picture:

I m not sure if the fossil site I visited 2 weeks ago is silurian or ordovician yet, but the fossile is interesting. What can it be, a shrimp or a cephalopod? Anybody have an opinion? The size is 3,5-4 cm long. Thanks Martin