Search the Community

Hi everyone, I recently bought this tooth on a whim. It was described as Diplocynodon sp. from the Kimmeridge Clay and reworked into the Albian-age Faringdon Sponge Gravels at the Wicklesham Pit. However, this description is obviously wrong in either species attribution or locality, since Diplocynodon is an alligatoroid genus dating to the Paleocene to middle Miocene, and could therefore not possibly have been found in the Sponge Gravels as Wicklesham Pit. Going by the label that came with the tooth, however, the seller whom I bought the tooth from just copied the information on the label provided by the person they bought the tooth from (I think I recognize the labelling-style, which means I may have a lead to trace the provenance - although that would very much depend on how long records are kept by that other seller and on how long ago the tooth left them). As the tooth isn't rolled, as much of the material form the Sponge Gravels is, and in preservation also doesn't match the buff through orange to deep red colours of most other Kimmeridge Clay material I've seen - whether from Faringdon or elsewhere (mainly Abingdon) - I'm pretty confident this tooth doesn't come from the reworked deposits at Wicklesham Pit. Rather, the state of preservation reminds me of finds from the Oxford Clay. In fact, the root of the tooth has some black deposit on it, that I take to be oxidized pyrite - something I've learned from this thread to be a not uncommon feature of Oxford Clay fossils. Another option as to the tooth's origin is that the tooth could come from Hamstead on the Isle of Wight, where Diplocynodon is known to occur. The dark/black colouration of the tooth and traces of what appears to have been buff-coloured matrix - as opposed to the light grey one of the Oxford Clay - may point in that direction. Though I consider this possibility less likely than the Oxford Clay one for the reasons set out below. Turning to morphology, the tooth doesn't seem to quite match examples of Diplocynodon I've been able to find online. For, while my tooth is densely ornamented with strong striations and exhibits - as far as I can make out - only one possible carina ("possible", as it may just be an apicobasal ridge), other teeth I've seen are mostly smooth/unornamented with what look to be two carinae (although alligatoroid teeth can have anywhere from zero through two carinae and I've also been able to find at least one Diplocynodon-tooth specimen with striations). Moreover, my tooth is conical, which at least rules out the more robust "short but wide" Diplocynodon morphotype. Diplocynodon hantoniensis teeth, Lower Hamstead Beds , Hamstead, Isle of Wight (source) Diplocynodon sp. teeh from the Faluns of Touraine, region of Savigné (source) Diplocynodon hantoniensis from the Eocene deposits at Barton, Hampshire; note the striations This brings us to a closer examination of the features of the tooth's ornamentation, as seen under a microscope. Visible are not just the black deposit on the root and strong and dense striations referred to above, but also what I make out to be remnants of the fossil's original yellow matrix; reticulation of striae; striations stopping close to the base of the tooth, rather than reaching the full apicobasal height; the overall texture of the enamel in between of the striae; and partial cross-section through the tooth enamel. In particular with respect to the cross-section, it may be useful to have a look at the below illustration, figure 4 from McCurry et al. (2019). For, of course it could just be my imagination, but I see greatest similarity with specimen A - that is, the brachauchenine tooth marked as P. interruptus (but see here for a discussion on the validity of this species). Cross-sections through the teeth of A. Polyptycodon interruptus, B. Globidens alabamensis, C. Goniopholis crassidens, D. Spinosaurus aegyptiacus, E. Ichthyosaurus communis, F. Zygorhiza kochii Similarly, if I look at the below diagram of dental ornamentation amongst various clades of marine animal (figure 2, ibid.), I find greatest semblance with tooth D, sauopterygia, pliosauridae indet. (although an argument could be made for A, crocodylomorpha, Deinosuchus rugosus, could be made as well). Phylogenetic distribution and morphological similarity of apicobasal ridges: A. Deinosuchus rugosus; B. Spinosaurus; C. Ichthyosaurus; D. Pliosauridae indet.; E. Globidens alabamensis; F. Hydrurga leptonyx; G. Mammalodontidae indet. I see further comparability in ornamentation when looking at images of the below tooth: As such, I believe that the tooth under discussion here is, in fact, a pliosaur tooth from the Oxford Clay. Moreover, seeing as the density of the striae all round and smooth enamel surface in between, I'm thinking the tooth might belong to Simolestes vorax. However, the traces of yellow matrix make me wonder whether the tooth indeed derives from the Oxford Clay, whereas the few vermiculations visible at the base of the tooth - rare on S. vorax - and the tooth's overall colour make me hesitant whether this might not actually be a Liopleurodon ferox (although I'd think the density of striations would be quite high, in that case; but for comparison with another small L. ferox tooth, see here). As it stands, I guess my questions are: Are the traces of yellow I'm seeing on the tooth indeed remnants of matrix, or could they be dried up glue? Where was the tooth found, what deposits does it derive from? Did it indeed come out for the Kimmeridge Clay, or did it come from either Oxford Clay or Hamstead Beds? Does this correlate with the traces of matrix seen on the tooth? Considering the geological origin of the tooth, is it more likely to be crocodilian or pliosaurian? Is the species attribution correct? That is, if crocodilian, is this indeed a Diplocynodon tooth? And if it were pliosaurian, does it belong to S. vorax or L. ferox? Thanks for your help! @paulgdls @PointyKnight @DE&i @RuMert @Jesuslover340 @caterpillar

Hi guys what species do you think these are? They are oxfordian from the Oxford clay at Peterborough 1. 2.

Hi guys, I’m thinking this is croc due to the carina, any thoughts on species? Thanks

Oxford Clay, Peterborough Member, Jurassic, Callovian, Cambridgeshire. I found this while fossil hunting in too much heat yesterday. I'm intrigued by the row of circles. I thought possibly decapod ornamentation, or something worm related. Thoughts and suggestions greatly appreciated.

Hi all, Just came across the exciting news that a new pliosaur genus and species has been described from the Callovian stage of the Oxford Clay near Yarnton in Oxfordshire. Dubbed Eardasaurus powelli (Powel's Yarnton lizard), it's a longirostrine thalassophonean pliosaur that is slightly more derived than Peloneustes philarchus (with which it shares numerous anatomical features) and forms a sister taxon to "Pliosaurus", Simolestes, Liopleurodon, Pliosaurus and brachaucheninae. A feature of particular interest in the dentition of this new species is the presence of connecting carina-like apicobasal ridges on some of its teeth. The article describing Eardasaurus powelli can be found here.

Hi guys, I have this tooth from the Oxford clay and i was wondering if anyone could put a solid ID on it thanks

Jurassic, Callovian, Oxford Clay, Peterborough Member. I found three this weekend I'm unsure about and would appreciate your thoughts. The first I think might be a decapod carapace.

Jurassic, Callovian, Oxford Clay, Peterborough Member, Yaxley, Cambridgeshire. The closest thing I can think of to what this looks like is a belemnite, but the overall shape is wrong, and the cross-section is very wrong for belemnites I've found at this site and elsewhere. I haven't completely ruled that out though, and opinions would be appreciated.

Hi, I wanted to ask about this marine reptile tooth from the Oxford Clay in England. The seller has listed it as a Pliosaur tooth belonging to the species Simolestes Vorax, and I wanted to check the id. Thanks in advance!

Jurassic, Callovian, Oxford Clay, Peterborough Member, Yaxley, Cambridgeshire I've found a few of these recently, and been trying to puzzle them out. I had thought they might be crab claws. Today I found my largest and best preserved one so far. I can clearly see plates, but I haven't found plates on images of Jurassic crustaceans, including in Martill. What it more looks like is the diagram of Ophiuroids in the book, which is what @JamieLynn, suggested might be the case, due to the plates. I have found brittle star at the site before, but the preservation was very different, not at all pyratised. So I'm wondering if this is Ophiroid, crustacean or something else entirely. If crustacean I was wondering about Thalassinidea, because I find so many burrows. I've attached images of the fossil and images from this article for comparison: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-paleontology/article/brittle-stars-from-the-british-oxford-clay-unexpected-ophiuroid-diversity-on-jurassic-sublittoral-mud-bottoms/8B34E184DFCF1CEEE275194CE2498B17 Any help would be greatly appreciated. The ends I find particularly fascinating.

As it's too stormy to collect fossils... Jurassic, Callovian, Oxford Clay, Peterborough Member, Whittlesey, Cambridgeshire. This was something very odd I found from a concretion in the Oxford Clay. They are great for three dimensional fossils such as ammonites. It looks like wood, in which case it's my first bit that isn't carbonised, or possibly bone. It could also simply be mineral. Another possibility is fish. I really wish there was more of it, that might have cleared it up, and would appreciate your thoughts.

Oxford clay, Peterborough Member, Jurassic, Callovian, Whittlesey in Cambridgeshire I collected this a few years ago, and I'm unclear whether it's a large cephalopod hook, or part of a fish, or something else entirely. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Jurassic, Callovian, Oxford clay, Peterborough Member, near Yaxley in Cambridgeshire. These are fragments I've picked up over time, wondering if they have bone texture or not. The bits I have that are unequivocally bone have better indicators. Opinions would be very welcome. The first I keep in my miscellaneous pile. These are all the same piece of rock. With something so small, even if it is bone, is it something that is potentially identifiable?

Oxford clay, Peterborough Member, Jurassic, Callovian, near Yaxley in Cambridgeshire. I spent the morning getting muddy in wet clay, and found this. I think it might be part of a hybodont spine, or other ornate fish spine. I've collected a fragment of hybodont spine from this site before. The surface does seem to be enamel, and the shape is slightly curved. Any assistance greatly appreciated.

I got the chance to go to the Oxford Clay twice over the last few days. I'm always looking for echinoderms at this site, and I prefer this one in winter when the vegetation has died back and I can spot lots of small, delicate detail. These are some if my favourite finds from the last few days.

I'm trying to determine if these are echinoid. I found these two on an Oxford Clay trip yesterday, Jurassic, Callovian, Peterborough Member, near Yaxley in Cambridgeshire. The first is, I think, a partial echinoid spine. My only doubts are because it's quite different from the others I've found at the site, it's a very different pattern. I would appreciate another opinion. The second has completely confused me. It looks black, so I thought it was pyrite, but when I photographed it, it's clearly a completely different material. It's a very odd shape, like a tiny snowman, and the only thing I thought it might be is a mamelon from an echinoid tubercle. I don't have anything else like this, and the different material puzzles me. I would really appreciate opinions on this.

It's been a sunny and very, very cold day. Most of the finds at the Yaxley site are small and intricate, lots of crinoid ossicles. What pops depends a lot on the weather conditions - today I found a lot of lighter coloured fossils, including my first coprolite from this site. There are a few I think I'll ask for help to ID.

I convinced my friend in England to send me some matrix from the Oxford Clay site I have the pleasure of hunting a few years ago. I really wanted to see what I could find in the micro stuff! He packed up a "Fosters sized package of Pay Dirt" as he referred to it and I got it in the mail a couple of weeks ago. It didn't take me long to go through it because I just couldn't stop! So many beautiful tiny fossils!! Star Crinoids, Belemnites, Ammonites, all of those I expected to find. What I was surprised to find was lots of tiny crab claws, couple of shark teeth and some possible Starfish ossicles! First the Ammonites: I am over the moon with my new favorite fossil: a Kosomceras spinosum. Even has a little bit of nacre still on it! 6mm I found an even better preserved one too, but the one with the nacre is special. On my previous hunt in this spot, all I had found were the Quenstedtoceras ammonites. They are still really cool too.... 1 cm Then there is this beauty which I am not sure what it is, but it might be Distichoceras bicostatum 5mm I found so many little crab claws and legs! Really elaborate ones and very simple ones: 3mm And of course, the crinoids - 5mm Some lovey little gastropods, including a really nice pyritized one: 5mm I think it's a Dicroloma trifida Not sure what these two are - both 3mm One of my unexpected surprises...this little tooth! 3mm And I THINK these might be starfish ossicles? If so, that would be really cool. They look an awful lot like the starfish ossicles we find in the Texas Cretaceous. But they might also just be crinoid bits. 2mm And last but not least- a little worm tube. I liked the crenulated edge on the bottom 3mm

Hi all, I recently decided to buy the below plesiosaur vertebra after having seen it for a long, long time. It dates to the Callovian of the Oxford Clay and was found at Peterborough. I suspect it may be attributed to Muraenosaurus leedsi, as it comes from a cryptoclidid plesiosaur, but is both larger and more elongate that the typical Oxford Clay Cryptoclidus vertebrae I'm familiar with. Supposedly coming from an old collection, it has a blackened exterior that doesn't cover the entire piece, with the more common buff colour visible underneath. As such, I expected the dark colouring to be simple dirt or may be some kind of consolidate that could be removed using acetone to leave a nice and clean looking vertebra in its place. However, since having tried acetone cleaning, the dark colour doesn't come off - suggesting that it isn't surface dirt and any consolidate, if present, is not soluble in acetone. I've also noticed that the black colour doesn't spread equally across the vertebra, which is most noticeable towards the top on the front face (first image) where one half of the vertebra is buff, the other black, with a hard separation in between. As this mottled pattern can be seen in other places on the vertebra as well, I thought that, may be, the vertebra might have been in a fire and have become covered in soot. I find additional support in the latter hypothesis in very brittle pieces of bone in one or two spots, with a charcoal-like grainy texture. Lastly, then, I've spotted a tiny edge of yellow staining/infill in an area where the vascular structure of the bone is exposed, with some white infill in an area adjacent - which I've now started worrying might be pyrite. My questions to you are: Origin of the blackening: Does the black clouding of the vertebra look like natural preservation? Related to the above: could the black clouding be due to pyrite decay? In contrast: could exposure to fire cause the clouding pattern seen on the vertebra? What consolidate might have been used to result in such colour patterning? Cleaning: Is there a way to remove soot from a fossil? Has anyone tried? Other than removal by acetone, what other ways might I try to remove an old, darkened consolidate? In case of decayed pyrite, I don't think there's anyway to clean the surface, other than, may be, through careful sandblasting, is there?

I found these fossils in Hampton Vale (it's quite a well known and fosiliferous site). The site is Oxford clay and jurassic. When doing wet sifting I found lots of these fossils all about 3 or 4mm and I think they are all fish jaws as they r way too small for rodents. This is the first of a few posts I will be doing for id on some fossils from there. Any help is greatly appreciated :). The pictures are of a few I found. Thanks, Harry