Joseph Kapler Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Are these Pachycephalosaurus teeth or Thescelosaurus teeth? From what I have read, they seem to be Thescelosaurus teeth, although they were labeled Pachycephalosaurus by the colector. I do not see the promient center ridge (on either side) as shown in many photo of Pachycephalosaurus teeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runner64 Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 I don't see the prominent center ridge either so I would label it as Thescelosaurus. Even if it were from pachysephalosaurid, it appears too worn to be able to positively ID it because we cannot see the surface of the crown and cannot see the pinch then. I am assuming this tooth is from Hell Creek Formation correct? If so, I would label it as Thescelosaurus neglectus. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Kapler Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 I should have mentioned that the old tag indicates Judith River Formation of Northwestern Montana. Attached are photos of the other sides of the teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runner64 Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Okay I see that changes everything then. Definitely not Thescelosaurus, different age. Maybe an Ankylosauridae tooth like Zuul? @Troodon would love for you to double check. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pemphix Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Definitely no Thesc - this comes from somewhat Anky or Pachy imo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 What size are these teeth? Width/Height Preservation is not great but cool teeth anyway Leaning toward both being Nodosauridae Northwestern montana is not JRF but Two Medicine Formation, do you have a county where these were found? If JRF: cf Edmontonia If TMF: Edmontonia rugosidens 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Kapler Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 The larger tooth (more worn) is approximately 0.45 X 0.16 inches and the other is 0.40 X 0.14 inches. A photograph showing the end-section views is attached. I am trying to track down the county in which they were collected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Sorry that was the width of the crown not thickness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Kapler Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 The width of the taller, more worn tooth is 0.31 inches and the other tooth is 0.4 inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 Thanks confirms my ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Kapler Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 Thank you. I appreciate your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now