Search the Community

Hello everyone! I've found quite a number of interesting things at Holden Beach, North Carolina since the replenishment project last year. Most of the stuff I've found I was able to identify fairly easily as I started to learn more (A big thanks to a large number of people on this forum, I did a lot of browsing here over the last year), but this vertebra is one thing I haven't pegged down 100% that I've been curious about. I found it back this April one morning, barely exposed in a tide pool. The area currently has things from Cretaceous to Pliocene washing out, but I think it looks fairly young as far as fossils go. The spinous process looks like it was broken off more recently, possibly due to the replenishment project; it wasn't a very gentle procedure for any of the fossils or seashells! I've heard from a couple of individuals that it may be a worn down manatee or dugong vertebra, which I am leaning towards myself, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to get additional opinions on it before the upcoming Aurora Fossil Festival. My phone camera is iffy with focusing, so sorry if the labels look to be somewhat blurry! I've included a couple of bonus pictures from the day I discovered it (I dropped my poor phone in the tide pool while I was snapping shots of it). It looks to be around 11 cm (4.33 Inches) across the transverse process, around 7 cm (2.755 Inches) long overall, and around 7.8 cm (3.07 Inches) wide on the body.

I friend found while digging for artifacts here in central Tex. Any ideas

Greetings everyone, Found this bone on the Maasvlakte beach in the Netherlands. Based on the location, probably Pleistocene, but could also be Holocene or Pliocene. It looks like a metapodial, and based on size and shape I was thinking maybe carnivore. An expert was able to tell me that it could be carnivore (or maybe beaver), and that it probably belonged to a young animal (since the outer layer of compact bone is really thin). I've been spending hours comparing this fossil to metapodials of all kinds of carnivores (and Castor fiber) matching this location, but I still can't figure it out. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Hi everyone, So. I am not from California but received this as a gift. I do have a background in Paleoecology (with a focus in the Pleistocene trophic ecology) but I am a bit out of practice as I have been working with extant systems for the past 10 years. In addition, my focus primarily involved East and Southern Africa. In any event, I am not quite sure yet. It is highly mineralized and I see what looks like algae. From what I gather, it looks like it was in the ocean for some time. the shape (especially in the first image) along with the highly mineralized cross section (enamel?) reminds me of a proboscidean...but I am not quite sure. I have been trying to look into the geology and paleontology of the area, but haven't found much for mammals outside of cetaceans...which I know little about. Any input would be greatly appreciated! thank you

IMG_6813.png (2).url IMG_6814.png.url IMG_6815.png.url IMG_6816.png.url IMG_6817.png.url IMG_6818.png.url

Please can you help me identify this fossil bone (the size of the pocket is about 10 cm)

Just one tooth from the York River in Virginia this weekend... but I’ll take it!

My husband and I spent the month of March in Santa Cruz, California where our daughter lives. We were happy to leave NY state weather behind and see what it is like to be in a place where the sun shines. It was great! I brought home a few beach finds and was wondering what they might be. They are very different than my home turf Devonian finds. The first group picture I was guessing might be from crabs. The largest center one is 3 inches. The 2nd & 3rd are pictures my husband found and tried to pass off as a giant tooth. I would have liked to have found a Shark tooth. This rock light weight and I was wondering if the bits on the side were fish pieces. The 4th and 5th are of a laminated object a little less than 11/2 inches. I have no guess on it. The last one is I am guessing is not a fossil but it had vertical and horizontal lines running through it so was different. I think I just liked it. I have a couple more that I will add in a second post Thanks for looking. Patti