Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'kem kem beds'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
    Tags should be keywords or key phrases. e.g. carcharodon, pliocene, cypresshead formation, florida.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Fossil Discussion
    • General Fossil Discussion
    • Fossil Hunting Trips
    • Fossil ID
    • Is It Real? How to Recognize Fossil Fabrications
    • Partners in Paleontology - Member Contributions to Science
    • Questions & Answers
    • Fossil of the Month
    • Member Collections
    • A Trip to the Museum
    • Paleo Re-creations
    • Collecting Gear
    • Fossil Preparation
    • Member Fossil Trades Bulletin Board
    • Member-to-Member Fossil Sales
    • Fossil News
  • Gallery
  • Fossil Sites
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Australia - New Zealand
    • Canada
    • Europe
    • Middle East
    • South America
    • United States
  • Fossil Media
    • Members Websites
    • Fossils On The Web
    • Fossil Photography
    • Fossil Literature
    • Documents

Blogs

  • Anson's Blog
  • Mudding Around
  • Nicholas' Blog
  • dinosaur50's Blog
  • Traviscounty's Blog
  • Seldom's Blog
  • tracer's tidbits
  • Sacredsin's Blog
  • fossilfacetheprospector's Blog
  • jax world
  • echinoman's Blog
  • Ammonoidea
  • Traviscounty's Blog
  • brsr0131's Blog
  • brsr0131's Blog
  • Adventures with a Paddle
  • Caveat emptor
  • -------
  • Fig Rocks' Blog
  • placoderms
  • mosasaurs
  • ozzyrules244's Blog
  • Sir Knightia's Blog
  • Terry Dactyll's Blog
  • shakinchevy2008's Blog
  • MaHa's Blog
  • Stratio's Blog
  • ROOKMANDON's Blog
  • Phoenixflood's Blog
  • Brett Breakin' Rocks' Blog
  • Seattleguy's Blog
  • jkfoam's Blog
  • Erwan's Blog
  • Erwan's Blog
  • Lindsey's Blog
  • marksfossils' Blog
  • ibanda89's Blog
  • Liberty's Blog
  • Liberty's Blog
  • Back of Beyond
  • St. Johns River Shark Teeth/Florida
  • Ameenah's Blog
  • gordon's Blog
  • West4me's Blog
  • West4me's Blog
  • Pennsylvania Perspectives
  • michigantim's Blog
  • michigantim's Blog
  • lauraharp's Blog
  • lauraharp's Blog
  • micropterus101's Blog
  • micropterus101's Blog
  • GPeach129's Blog
  • nicciann's Blog
  • Olenellus' Blog
  • nicciann's Blog
  • maybe a nest fossil?
  • Deep-Thinker's Blog
  • Deep-Thinker's Blog
  • bear-dog's Blog
  • javidal's Blog
  • Digging America
  • John Sun's Blog
  • John Sun's Blog
  • Ravsiden's Blog
  • Jurassic park
  • The Hunt for Fossils
  • The Fury's Grand Blog
  • julie's ??
  • Hunt'n 'odonts!
  • falcondob's Blog
  • Monkeyfuss' Blog
  • cyndy's Blog
  • pattyf's Blog
  • pattyf's Blog
  • chrisf's Blog
  • chrisf's Blog
  • nola's Blog
  • mercyrcfans88's Blog
  • Emily's PRI Adventure
  • trilobite guy's Blog
  • xenacanthus' Blog
  • barnes' Blog
  • myfossiltrips.blogspot.com
  • HeritageFossils' Blog
  • Fossilefinder's Blog
  • Fossilefinder's Blog
  • Emily's MotE Adventure
  • farfarawy's Blog
  • Microfossil Mania!
  • A Novice Geologist
  • Southern Comfort
  • Eli's Blog
  • andreas' Blog
  • Recent Collecting Trips
  • The Crimson Creek
  • Stocksdale's Blog
  • andreas' Blog test
  • fossilman7's Blog
  • Hey Everyone :P
  • fossil maniac's Blog
  • Piranha Blog
  • xonenine's blog
  • xonenine's Blog
  • Fossil collecting and SAFETY
  • Detrius
  • pangeaman's Blog
  • pangeaman's Blog
  • pangeaman's Blog
  • Jocky's Blog
  • Jocky's Blog
  • Kehbe's Kwips
  • RomanK's Blog
  • Prehistoric Planet Trilogy
  • mikeymig's Blog
  • Western NY Explorer's Blog
  • Regg Cato's Blog
  • VisionXray23's Blog
  • Carcharodontosaurus' Blog
  • What is the largest dragonfly fossil? What are the top contenders?
  • Hihimanu Hale
  • Test Blog
  • jsnrice's blog
  • Lise MacFadden's Poetry Blog
  • BluffCountryFossils Adventure Blog
  • meadow's Blog
  • Makeing The Unlikley Happen
  • KansasFossilHunter's Blog
  • DarrenElliot's Blog
  • jesus' Blog
  • A Mesozoic Mosaic
  • Dinosaur comic
  • Zookeeperfossils
  • Cameronballislife31's Blog
  • My Blog
  • TomKoss' Blog
  • A guide to calcanea and astragali
  • Group Blog Test
  • Paleo Rantings of a Blockhead
  • Dead Dino is Art
  • The Amber Blog
  • TyrannosaurusRex's Facts
  • PaleoWilliam's Blog
  • The Paleo-Tourist
  • The Community Post
  • Lyndon D Agate Johnson's Blog
  • BRobinson7's Blog
  • Eastern NC Trip Reports
  • Toofuntahh's Blog
  • Pterodactyl's Blog
  • A Beginner's Foray into Fossiling
  • Micropaleontology blog
  • Pondering on Dinosaurs
  • Fossil Preparation Blog
  • On Dinosaurs and Media
  • cheney416's fossil story
  • jpc
  • Red-Headed Red-Neck Rock-Hound w/ My Trusty HellHound Cerberus
  • Red Headed
  • Paleo-Profiles

Calendars

  • Calendar

Categories

  • Annelids
  • Arthropods
    • Crustaceans
    • Insects
    • Trilobites
    • Other Arthropods
  • Brachiopods
  • Cnidarians (Corals, Jellyfish, Conulariids )
    • Corals
    • Jellyfish, Conulariids, etc.
  • Echinoderms
    • Crinoids & Blastoids
    • Echinoids
    • Other Echinoderms
    • Starfish and Brittlestars
  • Forams
  • Graptolites
  • Molluscs
    • Bivalves
    • Cephalopods (Ammonites, Belemnites, Nautiloids)
    • Gastropods
    • Other Molluscs
  • Sponges
  • Bryozoans
  • Other Invertebrates
  • Ichnofossils
  • Plants
  • Chordata
    • Amphibians & Reptiles
    • Birds
    • Dinosaurs
    • Bony Fishes
    • Mammals
    • Sharks & Rays
    • Other Chordates
  • *Pseudofossils ( Inorganic objects , markings, or impressions that resemble fossils.)

Found 21 results

  1. Isolated theropod Teeth from the Kem Kem Basin continue to be a mystery. Plan on documenting all the different morphologies I have in my collection. Can provide discussion and aid in identification at some point. Just a note, different morphologies do not necessarily mean different species. There is lots of tooth variations in the dentition of a theropod, why its so difficult to nail down an ID even in the best of circumstances. Morph Type 1 Anterior Tooth Distal margin is almost straight Mesial margin strongly recurved Mesial carina extends 3/4 crown height Denticles are oriented towards the tip Serration Density: Distal - 2/mm (More dense toward the base) Mesial - 1.7/mm (More dense toward the base) Morph Type 2 (possible Carcharodontosaurid) Anterior Tooth Distal margin is slightly concave Mesial margin strongly recurved Mesial Carina extends to the cervex Denticles are oriented toward the tip Interdental sulci present Serration Density: Distal: 2/mm (More dense toward the base) Mesial: 1.9/mm (More dense toward the base) Morph Type 3 Maxillary? Mesial carina extends 3/4 crown height Denticles parallel to the base and rounded at tip Serration Density: Distal: 2.2/mm (More dense toward the base) Mesial: 2.4/mm (More dense toward the base) Additional Example Morph Type 4 (Possible Dromaeosaurid like) Lateral Tooth Tooth is recurved Mesial Carina extends to 3/4 crown height with a lingual twist Denticles parallel to the base Serration Density: Distal: 3.6/mm Mesial: 4.6/mm Additional Example Serration Density: Distal 3/mm, Mesial 5/mm Morph Type 4A (Dromaeosaurid like) Tooth is slightly recurved Mesial Carina extends to base with a lingual twist Denticles parallel to the base Serration Density: Distal: 3.6/mm Mesial: No Serrations Additonal Example Serration Density: Distal 3.3/mm, Mesial: No Serrations
  2. There is quite of bit Kem Kem dinosaur material coming on the market and some of it quite good. Will try address the identification issue on some items so at least you will know what your bidding on. This appears to match quite well with a Spinosaurid ilium, seller calls it a pelvic bone. Looks quite nice, complete with a concern are the areas circled in white. Not sure it's bone or matrix. Seller does comment on filled fractures and some are visible but that should not detract from the piece. What the seller is offering here is a Spinosaurus phalanx and claw toe bones. What I believe you have here is a Spinosaurid foot claw and a carpal (hand bone). So think about this listing as two separate bones not associated in any way. This is a listing of a Spinosaurus complete finger with claw. What I believe you have are 3 carpals from a Spinosaurid that are completely unassociated and are not a good match as a composite. Hard to say much about the claw other that it appears to be a foot claw of what cannot determine with photos provided. Again like the one above if you're interested in this bid it as 4 separate items. Seller has this as a Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone. I find it difficult to call this one since its a partial but looks more like a carpal. I dont think you can ID this to any specific critter, not much diagnostic and we know so little. Seller is offering these as 4 Spinosaurus phalanx toe bones. The two on the left look like carpals, probably from a Spinosaurid. The one on the far right is a phalanx but it's hard to determine from what dinosaur. The second from the right to fragmented to say. Seller here has 4 Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone for sale. They are toe bones and may be from Spinosaurid but who knows there are lots of other theropods in this region and identifying isolated bones is very difficult. If interested they should be identified as theropod indeterminate. Being offered as a Spinosaurus phalanx toe bone. It might be from a Spinosaurid but have same comments as above
  3. The past few weeks at the Tucson Fossil I ran across a few fake Spinosaur claws but also was surprised how many good ones there were on the market. I also understand the issues with online claws so decided to put this topic out to help collectors gain a better understanding of them since they are very expensive. These are my opinions and welcome others since no one person as all the answers. There is no bullet proof approach you can take to insure you have a claw that is not totally fake or composited. There are some things you need to consider. - First try dealing with what I call preferred Moroccan merchants, those are typically found at big shows and a few have online or FB sites, ones that specialize in Moroccan material are the best. They typically know what to look for and can point out issues with claws. Makes life a bit harder to get one but you want a good claw don't you. This does not take you off the hook its still YOUR responsibility to know what you are buying. - Unless you are an expert never buy one from Auction site. If you see one that interest you see seek assistant from an expert, not a collector friend, or post it here on the forum we have lots of opinions here. - 2D photos are not always the best to see what is going on with a claw, I prefer handling one. Composited claws can be good and photos don't show you all the issues. - Good preservation and quality are key for making life easy in deciding if its a good claw or not. There is where it pays to focus on the better claws. Claws that are deformed, partial, compressed, beat up or have matrix on them are very difficult to insure you have a good one and especially hard for experts to positively say its good. It always best to save and wait to buy a higher end one. - As a general rule try avoid claws that have matrix glued on them or have seams with matrix. The matrix is there for only one reason to hid trouble. Matrix is a red flag, just tread carefully when looking at one of these. Ask yourself why risk it and buy a potentially problem claw, there are plenty out there that are clean. PRICE = Preservation (Quality) + Size - Repairs - Real claws are expensive, simple as that. Nice ones in the 6+ inch range can easily fetch over 1K depending on quality, 7+ inches can go over 10K . So if you see big claws under 1K there must be a reason unless its the deal of a century and they exist. Most of the claws I show are in the 1-2K range for 4-6 inches. Here are a few from the Tucson show to give you an understanding what real ones look like. Focus on shape, the articulation end, blood grooves and preservation. These two are clean no matrix, no compression may have been broken and reattached, reasonable preservation. Nice claws for any collection Higher Grade - Fatter, nice surface finish, good preservation, few if any repairs. Couple of more examples. Honest merchant shows, some repair and resto. Excellent high end claw around 7 inches very very expensive Fake Claws These two were laying in the box and the merchant said he just had them fabricated. They look pretty good to a novice both reasonable size and configuration. Probably copied from a good one. Red Flags : Check out the graining its does not follow the curve of the claw but is straight. Uniform Color and looks too clean. Finish is flat with no hit of sheen seen on bone. Super long ones are the most suspect, here are two in a box. Unusually long and thin, usually the dorsal curvature is not smooth to the tip has kinks, the preservation is odd, hard to see bone, lots of surface repairs. These may be composited, faked or combo? Who knows to risky to find out. Off an auction site - terrible fake easier to spot- 6.9 inch claw One of the hardest items to replicate is the blood groove that is on either side of the claw. The groove is the widest at the articulation end and slowly tapers to a point to form a channel at the tip that extends outward beyond the dorsal surface. Here is an example of a perfectly preserved one. Here is the tip of the claw from above and you can see the blood groove is just a channel in the claw. Another Characteristic on these claws is that when looked at from the top or bottom they are shaped like an isosceles triangle. Much bigger at the articulation end than the tip. Preservation may affect this but most should be tapered. Like most theropods, hand claws vary depending on digit so there will be variations depending on that and the number of different Spinosaurids that exist in Kem Kem. This is a big unknown and we believe these type of claws all belong to the Spinosaurid family. But here are a couple more you can check out the blood grooves, articulation and shape
  4. Updated 11/7/17 Although a lot of this has already been posted on a number of topics, I thought consolidation it might prove useful with some additional information. If you're planning to purchase theropod teeth from Morocco's Kem Kem Beds or already have some in your collection check this out. Moroccan theropods are poorly understood and not a lot has been published. Very few articulated skeletons have been found and most are partial and without a skull. There is also lots of mis-information, mostly unintentional, from some dealers but especially online auction sites. Unfortunately these are the most misidentified commercially sold dinosaur fossil around. Please post your interest here on the forum before you buy. Background: The Kem Kem Beds also known as the ‘‘Continental Intercalaire’’ or "Continental Red Beds" is composed of three formations: Akrabou, Aoufous and Ifezouane Formation. The latter two are the dinosaur producing sediments with the Ifezouane being the principal one. They are Cenomanian in age. The attached drawing gives a representation how they lay. The distribution of the different groups of fossils in the Ifezouane Formation can been see in the pie chart below. Dinosaurs make up a small percentage of what is collected. So first lets identify what is known to the best of my knowledge. Theropods that have been described across North Africa (focus on large bodied theropods) Theropods that have been described in Kem Kem: (family) Spinosaurus aegyptiacus * (Spinosaurid) *Some paleontologist believe this species is unique to Egypt and Kem Kem material should be identified as Spinosauid indet. Lots of questions exist over Ibrahim (2014) diagnosis which validated this species. Carcharodontosaurus saharicus (Carcharodontosaurid) Deltadromeus agilis (Neovenatorid) Sigilmassasaurus brevicollis (Spinosaurid) Sauroniops pachytholus (Carcharodontosaurid) Theropods that have not been described from the Kem Kem but isolated teeth exist and have been reflected in scientific papers: Dromaeosaurid sp.? Hendrickx suggested these are actually Noasaurid indet. Abelisaurid indet. Theropod teeth that are sold commercially but no scientific evidence yet to link them to the Kem Kem: Abelisaurus sp. (Not described from North Africa) Rugops sp. (Only described from Niger) Bahariasaurus sp. (Only described from Egypt) Elaphrosaurus sp. (From Jurassic of Tanzania) So what is being sold and what are the issues? Spinosaurid Teeth are well understood by both collector and dealers, see photo. Issues are typically associated with restoration and compositing a larger tooth from multiple teeth. Teeth with matrix attached to them are suspect for restoration so be careful. At least two species of Spinosaurids exits and it's currently impossible to determine if they are Spinosaurus or Sigilmassasaurus or Undescribed taxon. Conflicting taxonomic hypotheses have been proposed. Ibrahim at al (2014) suggest that all specimens found belong to Spinosaurus aegyptiacus. Evers et al (2015) regard Spinosaurus maroccanus and Sigiilmassaurus brevicollis as belonging to the same taxon Sigiilmassaurus brevicollis which is also supported by Hendrickx et al (2016). Ever at al (2015) also described additional specimens from a second unnamed Spinosaurid. Bottom line we do not have enough specimens to eliminate ontogenetic or sexual dimorphism differences and accurately describe Spinosaurids in the Kem Kem. So these teeth are best identified as: Spinosaurid indet. Carcharodontosaurid Teeth, those that are compressed and blade like, first photo. Wrinkles by the distal carina are diagnostic to this species. Mesial teeth are fat, slender and look very different (D shaped) (next three photos). Two species currently are described Carcharodontosaurus saharicus and Sauroniops pachytholus and its impossible to differentiate teeth between these taxons. Similiar to the Spinosaurid debate one exists with these two species and if Sauroniops is valid. Similiar to Spinosaurids the big issue is having enough specimens to make a proper determination in what exists.. For these reasons best identified as : Carcharodontosaurid indet. Theropod indet. There are also intermediate size teeth (1 1/2") that are being sold as Deltadromeus or another theropod. I believe these could be Deltadromeus teeth but until we see scientific evidence this morphology of tooth should be identified as Theropod indet. No skull was found with the holotype or in any other discoveries so we do not know what look like. Carcharodontosaurid serrations Theropod indet. Dromaeosaurid: Teeth being sold as Dromaeosaurus are most likely misidentified, so here is what to look for. There are a few morphologies floating around but nothing as been formally described. Teeth are typically small around 1/2" (1.2cm) to over 1" (2.5cm) One morphology of these teeth are suggested by Hendrickx to be from a Noasaurid dinosaur. Although you see many sellers using the word Raptor next to what they are offering it's unknown if there is a true raptor in the Kem Kem. Abelisaurids are not raptors This figure identifies a study of isolated teeth by Richter (2015) and identifies two morphologies (A to D) and (E to G) as Dromaeosaurid. Mesial and distal carinae show a distinct density difference in serrations. The tip of the tooth extends past the base. On morph E/F a faint but visible constriction between crown and root is visible. The later form suggested by some paleontologists is most similiar to troodontids. Morph variant 3 that I have in my collection but not seen in any papers Mesial and distal carinae range show a distinct difference. A distinct twist to the mesial carina. Abelisaurid indet. With new discoveries we can put a real species name to these teeth but currently they are indet. These are easily identifiable but can easily be misidentified with certain morphologies of Dromaeosaurid teeth. The teeth are very compressed, the cross-section is oval at the base, the mesial side is strongly curved and the distal side is almost straight to the base of the tooth, see red lines in the photo. Mesial and distal carinae range from only a slight to a distinct difference. The only morphological feature that discriminates a tooth of a dromaeosaurid from that of an abelisaurid is the unique mesial and distal curvature profile of the abelisaurid crown. These teeth could belong to Rugops since it's an Abelisaurid but we have no scientific information to support that claim. Premaxillary Bottom Line: There are NO theropod teeth in the Kem Kem Beds that you can currently definitively assign to a Genus to, no less a Species.
  5. Most everything you see sold on the commercial market as far as Sauropod teeth, from the Kem Kem of Morocco, is label Rebbachisaurus garasbae or Rebbachisaurus. Are they identified correctly is the topic of the day. Feel free to add your teeth to show variations. What do we know of Sauropod teeth from this fauna? - very simple answer, very very little in fact less than we know of Theropod material which is very little to begin with. I have seen nothing published on isolated sauropod teeth from this locality to base any ID on. In the Kem Kem there is one described species a Diplodocoid, Rebbachisaurus garasbae and evidence of a large Titanosaurid. That evidence on the Titanosaurid is based only on a single caudal vertebra. The holotype that described Rebbachisaurus contained only one complete dorsal vertebra, parts of another vertebra, some neural spines, rib fragments, ischium, humerus and a few more fragmentary material but NO skull, NO teeth. Like many Theropod dinosaurs we have teeth but no skull to identify them against and label them to a family level. Why should we not do the same with sauropod teeth there is no difference. The other fact that I find interesting is Rebbachisaurus once thought to be a large bodied Sauropod has been redescribed to a smaller animal and the Titanoaurid from this fauna is a very large one. I used some of the sauropod teeth in my collections to look at the variations across teeth. Are these just due to jaw to jaw variations, positional variations, growth cycles, evidence of multiple sauropod species, preservation, environmental factors, sampling...etc... No answers but there is variation and to label all sauropod material as one genus I believe is not appropriate at this point. There are two groups one with small teeth and the other that are significantly larger. The first smaller group show variations with all of them and I call them Morph Type 1 to 4 Does not look like a Diplodocoid tooth, peg like more Titanosaurid? This tooth is faceted all around the crown. Very round This tooth includes a base with enamel on it Large Teeth Typical Diplo type tooth, weak cutting edge Two very crisp cutting edges and very rough texture in the enamel, no wear facet maybe sign its an unerupted tooth. Have not see the texture on any other tooth. Very pointed Crown - positional? No cutting edges More peg like, no cutting edges This tooth shows wrinkles around the shaft. No its not a Spino no cutting edges Felt sorry or these two orphans just added them to the mix. Positional, no cutting edges
  6. A New Pterosaur from the Kem Kem

    Looks like the Kem Kem is giving up a few new secrets. Xericeps curvirostris is the latest newly described Pterosaur from the region. Unfortunately it's a paywalled paper. The papers illustrations can be see in a thumbnail by hitting the 3 green lines on the upper left of the link http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195667117304044 Author :David M Martill, David M Unwin, Nizar Ibrahim, Nick Longrich Publication date 2017/9/14 Journal Cretaceous Research Publisher Academic Press Description Abstract A new genus and species, Xericeps curvirostris gen. et sp. nov., is erected for a highly distinctive pterosaur mandible from the mid-Cretaceous (? Albian to lower Cenomanian) Kem Kem beds of south east Morocco. The new taxon is referred to Azhdarchoidea based on the absence of teeth, slenderness of its mandible with sulcate occlusal surface, presence on the posterior section of the mandibular symphysis of short paired ridges bounding a central groove, and the presence of elongate foramina on its ... Scholar articles A new edentulous pterosaur from the Cretaceous Kem Kem beds of south eastern Morocco DM Martill, DM Unwin, N Ibrahim, N Longrich - Cretaceous Research, 2017 @LordTrilobite @Seguidora-de-Isis
  7. Kem Kem Vertebra

    Is it possible to ID this vertebra? Thanks ...
  8. More kem kem teeth to ID

    These teeth were all bought together, I'm guessing they are labeled more or less correctly, but I want y'all to varify. First was labeled pterosaur, so I'm guessing sirroccopteryx? The next was labeled carcharodontosaurus, which I'm guessing is correct. Lastly a tooth labeled dromeosaur, and from what I can gather, these teeth are from an indeterminate taxon? I can take more pictures, just tell me the angle.
  9. Need help with some teeth

    Until joining this forum, I thought that the kem kem beds were clear cut and simple in terms of teeth, you have crocs, raptors, carcharodantosaurs, and spinosaurs. I was of course, incrediblely wrong. I have acquired a few teeth from various suppliers, and they are of the kem kem beds. I got these way before I joined the forum and I would like to us your collective skills to get the best IDs possible. This will probably be the first of two posts. first up is a small tooth, labeled deltadromeus agilis, a species of which no skeletal elements are known. after that are two teeth in a lot of bones apparently from a sulphur mine.
  10. Moroccan bone fragments

    From the album WhodamanHD's Fossil collection.

    Four fragments that came with two other labeled theropod too the fragments. These are highly worn and poor in quality which makes me believe that it could be any bone from any thing. Bought online.
  11. Moroccan theropod tooth section

    From the album WhodamanHD's Fossil collection.

    This is a tooth section from morroco, bought online with some other tooth fragments.
  12. Spinosaurid tooth

    From the album WhodamanHD's Fossil collection.

    Spinosaurid tooth purchased from store. Labeled spinosaurus sp. from morroco.
  13. Siroccopteryx tooth

    From the album WhodamanHD's Fossil collection.

    Pterosaur tooth bough to online. From morroco, and I assume siroccopteryx.
  14. I was browsing the Internet and saw this vertebra for sale from my favorite locality the Kem Kem Beds. It's a good example of how the Moroccan's composite a dinosaur vertebra so I decided to post it. Here is the specimen and from a distance it looks acceptable. The centrum looks very nice and possibly a nice addition to a collection. Unfortunately after closer inspection everything else is questionable and red flags are raised. . Matrix fills the gap between the centrum and processes on both sides. Best conclusion is that all of the processes have been composited to the centrum. Is it possible that the processes belong to the centrum? Sure that's possible but another red flag is this bone. It looks nothing like an articulating process should look like and appears to be a peice bone that has been added to appear like one. Or are they adding it to be the neural spine which raises even more flags since the broken edges of one is already there. This vertebra is being sold as a Spinosaurus so it's always good practice to do a Google search and familiarize yourself with one. Scott Hartman's sketal drawings can be a good source. http://www.skeletaldrawing.com/ Not from Scott but here is an image of a dorsal vertebrae from a Spinosaurus. Compare it to the centrum in above specimen and draw your own conclusion. Identifying isolated vertebrae to a specific species from any locality is difficult enough. Identifying isolated centrums to a species is close to impossible especially from the Kem Kem. Comparative bones, images are just not available. Best to purchase a specimen because you like it and maybe someday it can be identified. For new collectors to the hobby always be cautious when you see matrix attached to a Kem Kem fossil. It's the media they use to hide imperfections, repairs and composites.
  15. Kem Kem fossils

    Hello everybody I have some indeterminated Kem Kem fossils. The first one is a piece of a jaw. I think it's reptile, but I don't know for sure. Anyone suggestions? (first 2 pics) The second is also a jaw and I think this one might be a fish. (last 3 pics) Thanks already
  16. Picture taken under both UV and ordinary light Lit.: Garassino, A., De Angeli, A. & Pasini, G. (2008): New decapod assemblage from the Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian-Turonian) of Gara Sbaa, southeastern Morocco. Atti Soc. it. Sci. nat. Museo civ. Stor. nat. Milano, 149 (I): 37-67, Gennaio 2008
  17. Pycnodont

    There are at least four different and so far undescribed Pycnodonts in Gara es Sbâa. This fish might belong to the genus Nursallia.
  18. Pycnodontidae indet.

    Lit.: Martill, D., Ibrahim, N. Brito, P., Baider, L., Zhouri, S.. Loveridge, R., Naish, D. and Hing, R. (2011): A new Plattenkalk Konservat Lagerstätte in the Upper Cretaceous of Gara Sbaa, south-eastern Morocco. Cretaceous Research 32 (2011) 433-446 Cavin, L. & Dutheil, D. (1999) A new Cenomanian ichthyofauna from southeastern Morocco and its relationships with other early Late Cretaceous Moroccan faunas. Geologie en Mijnbouw 78: 261–266, 1999. Cavin, L., H. Tong, L. Boudad, C. Meister, A. Piuz, J. Tabouell, M. Aarab, R. Amiot, E. Buffetaut, G. dyke, S. Hua, and J. Le Loeuff (2010): Vertebrate assemblages from the early Late Cretaceous of southeastern Morocco: an overview. Journal of African Earth Sciences 57:391–412
  19. New crocodylomorph from Kem Kem

    Lots of members in the forum collect Kem Kem material and a new relative to a crocodile has been described Lavocatchampsa sigogneaurussellae. Other crocodylomorphs that come from the Kem Kem include Hamadasuchus rebouli and Elosuchus cherifiensis both whose are mentioned on forum posts periodically because of their teeth. This new species is however much smaller than those two, 2 feet (60 cm) in length. What's cool about this discovery is that it was found with the upper and lower jaw preserved together with oddly shipped teeth that look mammal like. He possessed complex multicuspid teeth with for crunching through exoskeletons of insects, like mammals would. It's nice to see new material identified from the Kem Kem and now we have the opportunity to find and identify these teeth in the matrix pieces we collect. News Article: http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/30034/20161012/scientists-baffled-mammal-teeth-newly-discovered-crocodile-relative.htm Abstract with access to 7mb SVP paper http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02724634.2016.1211534
  20. The theropod landscape of the Kem Kem deposits continue to be more muddled with new discoveries and research but that should not surprise anyone. I've made several post about multiple Spinosaurid and Carcharodontosaurid in the Kem Kem and it continues to be supported by recent publications. The attached paper describes a femur that supports the concept that Abelisaurid's were in the Kem Kem. We are seeing teeth...so that's good. The paper however looks at the region: Figure 2 below, included in that paper, identifies the main theropod fauna of the region. The abbreviation KKCA under Morocco stands for Kem Kem Compound Assemblage. Please note that under KKCA there are two Spinosaurids mentioned Sigilmassasaurus and Spinosaurus indet. The paper concludes that there is to much ambiguity in the material studied to assign it to Spinosaurus aegyptiacus and further reevaluation is needed. Boy that sure puts an arrow through Ibrahim's Spino redesign. It also states that Kemkemia auditorei, paper attached, may be a crocodyliform or like the paper suggest a spinosaurid. The figure also shows two Carcharodontosaurid: Carcharodontosaurus and Sauroniops. Also Rugops is shown exclusive to Niger. More changes will come and hopfully in some lifetime we will have answers. So if you want to follow proper convention all Spino and Carch material should be identified has indeterminate but if you have that need to have a species name that's okay no one will know. Abelisaurid paper 1754-4.pdf Kemkemia paper 54a7b1c70cf267bdb90a1cf9.pdf
  21. dino verts/bones/jaw ID plz

    Hey all, anyone would have a clue about these? thanks!
×