Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'taouz'.
-
Hello , I have this beautiful and big sauropod tooth in my collection . I wanted to ask to which exact sauropod spezies it belongs to and which sauropods we're found there . Found in : Taouz, morocco Measures : 8 cm
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
- rebbachisaurus
- taouz
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Big spinosaurus tooth with Pathology and serrations?
JorisVV posted a topic in General Fossil Discussion
Here by my new Spinosaurus Aegypticus tooth from Taouz, Morocco. It is 4 1/2 inches. The colors are less common than your regular Moroccon Spinosaurus teeth. It has 0 restoration done to the tooth, and the quality is very high. Which I find special about this one. Noticed some slight patho and serrations on this tooth too? Could someone explain the patho perhaps.- 3 replies
-
- spinosaurus
- spinosaur
-
(and 10 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hi everyone! The owner of this tooth received it as a Deltadromeus but says he's not convinced. Size makes him doubt. Is it possibile to be sure of the ID of this tooth from Taouz, Marocco? Is it definetly Deltadromeus agilis? Thanks
- 4 replies
-
- deltadromeus
- tooth
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hey everyone! I just received a few teeth from the Kem Kem Beds near Taouz, Morocco. Among them one has me particularly stumped - I’ll do my best to provide as much information as possible, but let me know if more is needed! The tooth was listed as a theropod, though even the seller thought that assignment was only tentative. Its total height is 14mm. As the pictures above show, it’s moderately recurved as well as slightly curved lingually, with very distinct flutes running the whole length of the crown, 6 lingually and 9 labially, with the lingual flutes appearing stronger. It’s mediolaterally compressed, with a flat (or slightly concave?) lingual and more rounded labial profile, and a slightly lingually offset mesial carina. The distal carina reaches the base of the crown, whereas the mesial carina stops slightly short of it. The serration density on the distal carina is about 5/mm, on the mesial carina it’s about 7.5/mm (definitely noticeably smaller), getting more dense towards the base. When it comes to weird carnivores there’s of course no shortage in the Kem Kem, with a plethora of unusual teeth without a known owner. So far I haven’t come across one quite like this. I wouldn’t want to exclude the possibility of it being a theropod completely from the start. Still, my first thought went to Notosuchia: There’s an abundance of notosuchians known from the Kem Kem Group, probably as many described as undescribed. For one, there’s the small uruguaysuchid Araripesuchus rattoides (SERENO & LARSSON 2009), which can be excluded pretty easily. Aside from A. rattoides teeth being generally far smaller, the morphology doesn’t fit either: Specimens such as MNN GAD19 illustrate well that the largest teeth in Araripesuchus, its caniniforms, are recurved, but far more bulbous than what we are looking for. The other parts of its dentition are highly heterodont, with mostly small, low, rounded crowns. Additionally, none of its teeth are fluted in the fashion we see here. Next in line are the peirosaurids Hamadasuchus rebouli (BUFFETAUT 1994) and an as of yet undescribed taxon likely closer to more derived peirosaurids, Peirosauridae B [ROM 52620 and ROM 49282]. The latter is often attributed to H. rebouli, but will hopefully be revised after the description of BSPG 2005 I 83. IBRAHIM et al. 2020 lump everything into Hamadasuchus, but didn’t do their own analysis and note that reevaluations are in order. Similar to Araripesuchus, peirosaurids are highly heterodont, with conical anterior teeth and lower, more robust posterior teeth. The relatively high number of specimens helps in this regard: While recurved, the anterior teeth in Hamadasuchus are subconical and not overtly fluted. The posterior teeth, while possessing serrated carinae and showing some fluting, are far more stout and bulbous. In Peirosaurid B, the anterior teeth, most notably the caniniforms, are indeed fluted and recurved, but are very conical and do not possess serrated carinae. The posterior teeth, while possessing serrated carinae, some mediolateral compression, and being overall taller than in Hamadasuchus, are not recurved or fluted, but symmetrical and far more blunt than the pointed form we are looking for. Lastly, there are the ziphosuchians: IBRAHIM et al. 2020 use ‘Candidodontidae’ CARVALHO et al. 2004, though they note it’s unclear what exactly this family comprises of, so it might be best to treat its members simply as basal ziphosuchians. Libycosuchus brevirostris (STROMER 1914, 1915) has very little preserved in terms of teeth, and sits between other notosuchians which have very strange dentitions themselves. Looking at relatives such as Candidodon (CARVALHO & CAMPOS 1988), it would appear that these basal taxa would also have had mostly heterodont dentitions with conical anterior and low posterior teeth. Additionally, BUFFETAUT 1976 notes that the teeth appear to have been comparatively small overall, which appears right when looking at the alveoli of BSP 1912. I couldn’t find any reference to fluting or serrations in its immediate relatives, only in the far more derived members of this group, called ‘advanced notosuchians’ by POL & LEARDI 2015. There’s some evidence that animals similar to these younger South American taxa might have existed in the Kem Kem noted by IBRAHIM et al. 2020, but even then, the anterior teeth in this group show a consistently conical or teardrop-shaped cross-section, not the compressed shape we see here. IBRAHIM et al. 2020 go on to refer some material to Sebecidae SIMPSON 1937, though this is likely due to the general instability in notosuchian taxonomy. The material isn’t described in the text, but is highly doubtful to be from a true sebecid, as that family is only known from the Maastrichtian onward. Quite frankly I’m at a bit of a loss. I know trying to ID Kem Kem teeth too often ends in ‘We just don’t know’, and having looked at the options I haven’t made much headway - the tooth doesn’t really resemble anything that’s described or goes into the direction of what’s undescribed and fragmentary, at least to me. So I’d like to hear your opinions - is there something I have grossly overlooked? Is it just a very weird notosuchian or something else? Could it be a theropod after all? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Thank you very much for your help! BUFFETAUT, E. 1976: Der Land-Krokodilier Libycosuchus STROMER und die Familie Libycosuchidae (Crocodylia, Mesosuchia) aus der Kreide Afrikas BUFFETAUT, E. 1994: A New Crocodilian from the Cretaceous of Southern Morocco CARVALHO, I.d.S., & CAMPOS, D.d.A. 1988: Um mamífero triconodonte do Cretáceo Inferior do Maranhão, Brasil CARVALHO, I.S., RIBEIRO, L.C.S. & AVILLA, L.S. 2004: Uberabasuchus terrificus sp.nov., a New Crocodylomorpha from the Bauru Basin (Upper Cretaceous), Brazil IBRAHIM andabunchofothers, 2020: Geology and Paleontology of the Upper Cretaceous Kem Kem Group of Eastern Morocco POL, D. & LEARDI, J.M. 2015: Diversity Patterns of Notosuchia (Crocodyliformes, Mesoeucrocodylia) During the Cretaceous of Gondwana SERENO, P.C. & LARSSON, H.C.E. 2009: Cretaceous Crocodyliforms from the Sahara SIMPSON, G.G. 1937: New Reptiles from the Eocene of South America STROMER, E. 1914: Ergebnisse der Forschungsreisen Prof. E. Stromers in den Wüsten Ägyptens. II. Wirbeltier-Reste der Baharije-Stufe (unterstes Cenoman). 1. Einleitung und 2. Libycosuchus @Troodon
- 6 replies
-
- kem kem beds
- taouz
-
(and 4 more)
Tagged with:
-
From the album: Dinosaurs & flying reptiles
Unidentified raptor fossil, likely clavicle, from kem kem, in Taouz, Morocco middle Cretaceous 100 mya