Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'conemaugh group'.
Found 20 results
-
With the semester having ended yesterday, I figured I would go hunting today at one of my favorite Carboniferous plant localities. It is located in Southwestern PA, and is in the Connellsville Sandstone member of the Casselman Formation, which is in turn part of the Conemaugh Group. It is late Stephanian in age. The Connellsville Sandstone itself represents a fluvial deposit made up of sediment from the then young Appalachian mountains. It is a very thick and massive layer; because of this it has been quarried for building stone for hundreds of years. The locality that I collect at is in a valley that was once heavily industrialized with a railroad, coal mines, oil wells, and sandstone quarries. These quarries were located in the Connellsville and their cliffs can still be seen today. The specific deposit I collect at in this valley most likely represents a slow moving area of the river, where deposition was rapid in times of high water. It preserves a classic post-Rainforest Collapse flora, with seed ferns, tree ferns, and Calamites being the most common fossils. Lepidodendron and other lycopods are rare to nonexistent. In the 1960s, W.C. Darrah, a paleobotanist, collected here and found one of the earliest examples of the conifer Walchia. Vertebrate remains can be found here, as shown in my most recent post. I assumed that today would be a mediocre trip, as rain was in the forecast and the ground is covered in leaves. However, the rain let up before I arrived at the site. Due to the lack of foliage, though, I was able to explore some areas that were once quarried for sandstone. I noticed an area made up of finer-grained sandstone, and thought that it might have fossils. Upon further inspection, though, it lacked fossils but was full of massive rip up clasts of soft shale. These showed that the river was eroding through a deposit of unconsolidated clay and then subsequently depositing these chunks down stream. I had never seen rip-up clasts in such large numbers and in such a large size, so it was great to get to see it. I then carried on to the plant locality. The plant locality was not at all covered in leaves, and due to the weather I had it all to myself. I concentrated my efforts on specific lenses of plant material that represented areas of quiet deposition, perfect for well preserved plants. I found some good stuff, as is shown below, but my favorite find was that of Cyclopteris fimbriata. It is a strange form genus of leaves that grew at the base of seed fern fronds. I had found Cyclopteris fossils before; however, this was the first time I had found one of the fimbriata species. The name says it all: their edges are marked by fimbriated projections of leaf tissue. It was certainly interesting to see some new material today. I also found my largest Neuropteris ovata frond thus far, and, although it wasn't perfect, it was a welcome discovery. All in all, it was a great hunt and it was nice to be out in nature!! Hope you guys all have a happy and safe Thanksgiving! View of the old quarry: The rip-up clasts: The plant locality itself, as I said before it is a shaly layer of the Connellsville Sandstone, most probably representing a backwater of a river: Pith cast of a Calamites: Annularia stellata whorls Cordaites sp. A new species for me and the strangest looking find, Cyclopteris fimbriata: My largest find, as well as my largest plant fossil to date: Either Neuropteris or Laeveinopteris:
- 20 replies
-
- 15
-
-
- plant
- casselman formation
- (and 4 more)
-
Found this small oddity while breaking apart limestone. The pitted appearance was interesting. The pits also seem to extend the whole way through. They also appear to wrap at a 90 degree angle on the side that isn't broken. The broken side reveals how they go through. I chipped away a little at the matrix, but didn't go too tough to keep from breaking it. Whole specimen with scale: (stacked photo) Showing outside 90 degree wrapped edge with same appearance: (stacked photo) Broken edge showing channels going through the width. Additional view of the top (unstacked photo)
- 20 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- limestone
- brush creek limestone
- (and 5 more)
-
Hi all, Recently I was collecting at a locality that exposes the Duquesne Limestone and shale, which if you’ve seen any of my previous posts you’ll know that I’ve collected extensively. But for those of you that have not, the Duquesne shale is a layer of black, carbonaceous shale found in areas where the Conemaugh group is exposed. This layer is chalk full of disarticulated vertebrate remains, but some of the most recognizable are the teeth of Orthacanthus and Xenacanthus. These were eel-like sharks that existed from the Devonian-Triassic and had bicuspid or tricuspid teeth. They grew to be about 10-12 feet at the largest and thrived in the swampy lakes of the late Pennsylvanian. It’s somewhat uncommon for me to find a large Orthacanthus tooth (which are tiny compared to Otodus sp. )and it is even rarer for me to find a tooth with feeding damage. It seems to me that, understandably, many collectors of Cenozoic shark teeth are disappointed when they find shark teeth with feeding damage, but for me at least when I find Paleozoic shark teeth with feeding damage it makes it even more special. Last time I was collecting I did just that. Interestingly enough this Orthacanthus compressus tooth is my largest yet and has a very unusual break. The cusp that is missing is not broken cleanly at the enamel, rather, when it broke off it took a good chunk of the rooth with it. To me at least this would indicate that the shark was using quite a bit of force when it bit down, and whatever it bit in to must have been very hard and made for a painful meal for the shark. It’s important to note that the other cusp was damaged recently and isn’t feeding damage. I’m not one to heavily speculate but I’d imagine that it had to have bit in to one of the heavily armored Paleoniscoids for damage of this nature to take place. Or, who knows, the tooth might have just been old. Whatever happened to break the cusp is lost to time, I guess. Regardless, I think it’s a wonderful find and reminds me that these animals were truly alive and had imperfections. Hopefully you all find this as interesting as I do .
- 1 reply
-
- 6
-
-
- conemaugh group
- xenacanthus
- (and 5 more)
-
Went looking for ferns and plants today. Spent my lunch hour splitting shale nearby. This one caught my eye. The ghosted pattern around the stem is interesting. I feel like it’s part of it seeing how symmetrical it is. And ideas? Length of the stem part is 2 1/8” (Don’t have a metric ruler handy) To me, the bottom portion is the base, so the shape is confusing.
-
I've had this specimen sitting in my "I'll get to it later" pile since last year. I've learned a lot about Cephalopods the past year, one of them being the differences between Nautiloids and Ammonoids. Upon re-inspection of this yesterday, I noticed the shell lines, but more importantly the suture lines caught my eye. These do exist here, but I would call them pretty rare to find. Not being an expert, I would consider Wellerites or Schistoceras, but these are based on quick comparisons using a Pennsylvanian Cephalopods of Ohio book I have. I started to clean up the rock using an air scribe, but I've only got about 30 minutes into it so far. I need to take much better photos, but the shell exterior is messy like this. You really need to rotate it under light and/or a microscope to see the sutures great. There is so scale in the photo, but it's 20mm from front to back of the inner exposed whorl. The top of the photo is still more shell continuing on another 9mm and I started to expose more suture pattern there. The top of the exposed whorl has some shell material pattern shown in a black color.
- 6 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- ammonoid
- glenshaw formation
- (and 5 more)
-
Possible ID of Trepospira sphaerulata from a local gastropod expert, but he isn’t sure. Similar ones in a group with original specimen at the right. Left is suspect of being related, but it might be.
-
- 1
-
-
- glenshaw formation
- conemaugh group
- (and 5 more)
-
Hi all, I discovered this rather unusual fossil at an exposure of shale a few feet above the Mahoning coal of the Glenshaw formation, which is Westphalian D in age. I was thinking that it is probably just Lepidostrobophyllum, as the Mahoning coal is pre Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse so lycopod material is relative common within its horizon. For those of you that don’t know, Lepidostrobophyllum is a leaf like part of the Lycopod reproductive cone. However, I have found arthropod material at this exposure before and just wanted to make sure that it is in fact Lepidostrobophyllum and not something else. Thanks in advance
- 7 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- conemaugh group
- glenshaw formation
- (and 5 more)
-
Hi all, Here’s an interesting plant find. I discovered it in a locality in Western PA known for producing good plant fossils. I’m thinking seed fern, maybe related to Alethopteris somehow but to be honest I’m not sure what the species is. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance Stratigraphy: Connelsville Sandstone of the Casselman Formation of the Conemaugh Group. Age-Late Pennsylvanian, ~305 MYA
- 4 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- pennsylvania
- carboniferous
- (and 8 more)
-
Not sure what these are. There was loose shale near where I dig scattered on the ground. It had different things in it than I’m used to seeing. Maybe it was dumped from a different part of the strata, but shouldn’t be much further away. I’m not great with fish parts, are they maybe fish parts? Should I scratch them out or maybe some vinegar? There are a few other pieces that look tooth/horn shaped.
-
Hi all, I’ve posted a few topics on the forum but have yet to show my entire collection, or my best finds. So here goes. A little background on me. I’ve been fossil hunting since I was very young, probably since I was 4 when I found a plant fossil in my backyard. Over the past few years as I have ventured into adulthood I have gotten very interested in the fossils of the Pittsburgh area. I will display my best finds here and periodically update the thread with new finds. As a note, many of the vertebrate fossils I have found are rare and may be important to science. I have been in contact with @jdp about this and will most likely be donating the most important ones to the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. If any of my IDs seem strange or wrong please let me know, I am always learning and value new info. I guess I’ll start with the marine invertebrates. To start out we can start small, with brachiopods, cephalopods and horn corals. The first is a Linoproductus from the Ames Limestone, a classic Pittsburgh marine zone.
- 73 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- carboniferous
- glenshaw formation
- (and 3 more)
-
Conditions in Western PA have been unusually warm recently, with highs in the 40s and 50s. I decided to take advantage of this warm spell by getting a little bit of fossil hunting in. I decided to do a hunt focused on plants as I’ve been hunting for vertebrates for the better part of the last year and a half and, although I could never get tired of vertebrates I thought some variety was well overdue. So I headed to one of my favorite plant localities in the area. It is located in the Connellsville Sandstone of the Casselman Formation, which is in turn the upper half of the Conemaugh Group. The sandstone is around 305 million years old. The Casselman Formation holds the record of the tail end of one of the largest plant extinctions in our earths history. The prolonged wetness that had existed for much of the Pennsylvanian gave way to dryer conditions, and, as a result, the lycopsid forests fragmented. Many of these lycopsids went extinct during this event, which is known as the Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse. Conifers took advantage of these newly opened ecological niches. Their fossils have been found in this area, although I have never personally found them. Anyway, on to the fossils. Today I mostly found partial Pecopteris fronds, Neuropteris pinnules and Annularia leaflets. I’m going to include some of my better finds from other trips as well, as this trip was rather unproductive. Pictured below is the best Annularia I found today. Or Asterophyllites. I’m not sure. We’ll just go with Calamites leaves for now.
- 31 replies
-
- 9
-
-
- calamostachys
- pittsburgh
- (and 11 more)
-
Hi all. I was wondering if I could get some sort of specific ID on a possible insect wing that I found in the roof shales of a thin coal that is dated to the Late Pennsylvanian or Kasimovian. Fossil plants and some vertebrate material can be found in the same shale. Stratigraphic information: From a roof shale of a thin coal roughly 30 feet below the Brush Creek Limestone of the Glenshaw Formation in the Conemaugh Group. Discovered in the suburbs outside of Pittsburgh.
- 18 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- cockroach
- carboniferous
- (and 5 more)
-
Hi all, This specimen was found in a black shale layer that lays directly and uncomfortably upon the Duquesne Limestone, which is Late Pennsylvanian age. It was found in the suburbs of Pittsburgh. Both the shale and limestone are filled with vertebrate fossils, especially the scales, teeth and spines of paleoniscoid fish. As far as I know there is no species list from the shale but Elonichthys has been reported. I know skull roofs can be very diagnostic so any rough estimates of genus would be very helpful! I apologize for the picture quality, my phone is a brick.
-
To continue discussion on the specimen listed here, with renewed focus on it being a Cephalopod. As of right now, I'm deciding between Solenocheilus and Ephippioceras. Going directly by the book: Index Fossils of North America (1944, 1980 printing), I can see positives for both. Solenocheilus (Lower Mississippian to Lower Permian, IN, IL, MO, KS, TX and Europe) Recommended by a local expert, but doesn't specialize in Cephalopods. Ephippioceras (Mississippian in Europe, Pennsylvanian, Ohio to Kentucky, Nebraska to Texas) The raised line along the midline of the plate photo is what is selling me on this one. My specimen is much larger than the plate, but not quite double the size. So, two new photos of the specimen. First, looking at the line: (After seeing it this way, I was looking at it 90 degrees in the wrong direction) Flipped, End over end. So, any opinions? I was thinking of removing more matrix from the matrix heavy size, but it will certainly remove the shell material and leave the steinkern.
- 4 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- cephalopod
- glenshaw foarmation
- (and 4 more)
-
A second large Clam or Oyster? I dug a huge piece of limestone out of the hill and split it into three with a sledge hammer so that I could actually pick pieces up. After the heat this weekend, they were easy to pick apart once I got them home. Yesterday, I found the first piece. This is the one I found today. When it came out of the rock I was a bit shocked at how large it was. I carefully tapped around the specimen and was able to remove most of the surrounding rock carefully. This is the larger of the two pieces I found this weekend. I have less confidence in identifying it as has less features than the first piece. You can see shell material flaking off in the 3rd and 4th photos below. The fossil after I found it: Then, once I removed it from the rock:
- 3 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clam
- glenshaw formation
- (and 8 more)
-
I love and hate finding large fossils. They are really interesting and striking to look at, but I have a hard time getting an ID on them. I dug a huge piece of limestone out of the hill and split it into three with a sledge hammer. After the heat this weekend, they were easy to pick apart. Yesterday, out popped this piece. There is another one I found today that I will be posting after this one. This piece has several wavy ridges. The shell material looks pearly, and perhaps some calcite replacement has happened. There was a piece of shell stuck on the mold portion as well. I'm seeing about 6 distinct ridges. Anyone know what it might be? Before I removed it from the rock: Several views after removing, trying to show the ridges:
-
Two mystery mini fossils. I’ll include scale photos, with marks at 1/2 mm. I’m on the lookout for Carboniferous Trilobites, and examples I’ve seen are very tiny in this formation, no more than 1/2 inch long.
-
I am nearly sure the top piece is Metacoceras. The middle is a clam, but what species? Perhaps Astartella concentrica? The bottom, what is that thing? 6477/6478 show it in detail. I find these a lot. Are they brachiopods? Not shown, but there is a horn coral on the back of the piece in a cross section.
-
I’ve been air scribing this piece out and I figured it was a Mooreoceras. However, the ridge going up the front is something I haven’t seen on this species. Is it just squashed a bit? It’s a pointed oval in shape. The length is nearly 3 inches.
-
Obviously, the tetrapod is from the Carboniferous Missippian...out by the old airport...does anyone know where that Casselman formation/Conemaugh Group is? Even though the Fedexia was found in 2004, it would be nice to resume some work and see what else is there...any ideas, any interest?
