Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'posterior'.
Found 17 results
-
Hey, going through some finds of last year i came across this tiny Hexanchid tooth. 0,9cm x 0,5cm, Miocene/Pliocene, Antwerp area, Belgium I've seen Hexanchid posterior teeth before and they look quite different.. (from the book 'Neogene Sharks of Antwerp' by Stephane Knoll) Could mine be juvenile Notorynchus or Hexanchus? Thx, Dries
-
From the album: Fin Lover's South Carolina Finds
- 3 comments
-
- 4
-
-
- angustidens
- oligocene
- (and 5 more)
-
Hey hi Everybody! I like the unusual teeth. And posterior teeth are some of the most unusual in any given species. So I thought I would start a thread for posterior shark teeth of any species. To kick it off..... Here are some from Shark tooth hill (round mountain silt). I think these are Carcharodon hastalis and (?) planus. The smallest one is just under 1/8th inch wide. So, if You have any posterior shark teeth - please post pictures here. Thanks, Tony
-
.thumb.jpg.51c371f10936bbc883322324e44cc518.jpg)
Shark Cretodus posterior Eagle Ford Formation
JamieLynn posted a gallery image in Member Collections
From the album: Texas Cretaceous Fossils : Sharks and Rays
-
From the album: Fin Lover's South Carolina Finds
So close to being perfect!-
- 1
-
-
- angustidens
- oligocene
- (and 5 more)
-
From the album: Fin Lover's South Carolina Finds
-
- 1
-
-
- angustidens
- oligocene
- (and 5 more)
-
Today I went to a nearby creek in north Florida and came across these fossils that I need help identifying. 1. Definitely posterior. Maybe bull, lemon, or hammerhead? 2. I don't know if I've seen this before, at first I thought small hastalis, but then I noticed what appears to be a cusp on the left side. (it's just on the tape measure so you can see the cusp better.)3. Turtle, but I was wondering with the odd shape if it was possible to tell where from.Thanks!
-
I found my smallest posterior angy yesterday (9 mm total height and about 3 mm crown height). One cusp is quite mangled, but I don't know how it has stayed together (and feels solid) if it was broken. My first guess was that it is damaged, but I wonder if it could be pathological. It appears in the first two pictures to have root material over the cusp area. Thoughts? Thank you!
- 2 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- angustidens
- posterior
- (and 1 more)
-
From the album: Fin Lover's South Carolina Finds
Date found unknown -
From the album: Fin Lover's South Carolina Finds
Date found unknown -
Hey everyone, Can anyone help me identify these two small juvenile posterior shark teeth that I recently found in Charleston, SC? Megalodon? Angustiden? Great White? Too hard to tell? thanks in advance!!
-
After I remarked that the little tooth below (found on Morris Island, South Carolina) looked interesting on his trip report thread, forum member @Family Fun kindly gifted it to me, asking only that I help identify the species and share the result. My assessment is that this is an Isurus retroflexus posterior tooth, but hopefully others here can either confirm or correct that ID. This tooth has a non-serrated crown that is still fairly sharp and to my eyes at least has the raised labial platform indicative of I. retroflexus. There is a single cusplet on one side. Thanks for your help with this one, and thank you @Family Fun for your generosity! (Unfortunately, the tooth split down the middle on its journey to me, which is the crack you can see in the photos, but I was able to glue it back together.)
- 8 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- isurus retroflexus
- morris island
- (and 3 more)
-
Hi again I have a question what did prognathodon use it’s posterior teeth for I was just looking at a skull and they seemed different do they have a different use then the other teeth? @Troodon
-
Hi all, the other day I went out hunting found some really cool stuff, which I'll post soon, but I find these 3 interesting teeth which I think are posterior megs, though I think one (smallest) is more likely than the other two. They were found in Havelock NC.
-
Hello everyone! Today, I do not have an identification request, but I do have a request for some specific pictures. I have been having a hard time finding side view pictures of posterior juvenile megalodon teeth. If any of you have these tiny megs and don’t mind snapping a side view picture for me, it would be much appreciated. Thanks!
-
Email Correspondence with David Ward about My Megalodon Tooth
mattbsharks posted a topic in General Fossil Discussion
I was curious about the position of this megalodon tooth from my collection, and how big of a shark it may have come from. David Ward was kind enough to answer my questions. His response explains why root width is a better indication of the size of a shark than slant height. Hi David, Here is what I believe to be a posterior meg. for I was hoping you might be able to offer me some insight into just how big this particular shark might have been, how big the teeth in the front of the jaw could have been, and if this is a record or near record sized posterior or not. It is missing a bit of the tip. The specs are 5.6" long side, 5.2" short side and 5.1" from root to root. You would know better than I would, but, based on the chunk missing at the tip, I would guess it would have been about 5.9-6" with the tip intact. I hope you might be able to offer me some insight, but if you are too busy I totally understand. Best, Matt His response: Hi Matt, I agree, it is a passive tooth. My best guess is that it is from the 9th file from the centre. This is based on its height to width ratio. I am not sure whether it is an upper or lower, but if pushed I would go for lower because lowers have more of an angle at the root base as opposed to a curve seen in uppers. This is not a particularly good character this far around the jaw. The root looks more like a 7th file so it could be a bit stunted. This can happen in very old sharks, the teeth continue to be formed wider faster than they grow taller. As for how big the shark was, I guess this must have had at least 6.5 inch front teeth which makes it as big as you can get. I have no idea how long the shark was. From a scientific perspective, we don’t tend to regard the size of individual teeth as particularly important, but I can quite see why, from the point of view of a collector, you do. Don’t try to restore the chipped tip. It is a classic chisel fracture and an important part of the history of the tooth. It shows it was in collision with a dense bit of probably whale bone, unusual in the more lateral files. Enjoy your tooth, Best wishes, David. and, on a slightly unrelated note, here is a pathological megalodon tooth from my collection. I just completed restorations to the root.
-
This tooth is a lower from the final tooth position (most posterior) on the left side as indicated by the bulge on one side of the tooth and lack of overlapping facet. The lingual face of the tooth is shown in the photo as indicated by the distinct delineation of the crown enamel and the root (less distinct on the labial surface). Teeth in a more anterior position have overlapping facets on both edges (with the symphyseal having both facets on the lingual face). The stratigraphic information for this locality is questionable and so is specified vaguely. The environment is marine shell hash that may span late Miocene-Pleistocene. Dr. Richard C. Hulbert, Jr. from FLMNH had this to say about the locality: There are two “formations” found near the surface in that area of the state. One is the middle to late Miocene Peace River Formation. The other “formation” possible is has been informally called the Okeechobee Formation by Tom Scott, and consists of the sandy shell beds formerly called the Caloosahatchee, Bermont, and Fort Thompson formations. On the geologic map of Florida published by the state’s geological survey it is not designated a formal name and is instead listed as Pliocene/Pleistocene shelly unit. Even if found in situ within the Plio/Pleistocene unit, such specimens could be reworked out of the Peace River Formation. If you are finding them in modern creek alluvium, it will be difficult to be sure which is their original depositional unit.
.thumb.jpg.51c371f10936bbc883322324e44cc518.jpg)
