Florissant Fossil Quarry Fun

[gutenfrog]

Hi,

 

I'm a new member here, though I've read threads on the forum for years. In the warmer months, I'm an entomology geek, and I'm usually out trapping moths at my backyard UV setup or snapping pictures of dragonflies and the like. I'm also a longtime rockhound and paleontology fan, and it's the combination of my love for bugs, our cold-as-all-get-out winters here in MN (in winter there are no bugs), and the availability of fossil shale from the private Florissant Fossil Quarry that brings me here.

 

Long story short, I'm interested in finding some fossil insects, and I've recently purchased several pounds of shale from the private quarry. I've already found a gorgeous fossil leaf (presumably an extinct elm, if my research online is right; that's the second photo, taken via smartphone), and I think I've found a fossil fly of some variety. My question: Is it wishful thinking? This photo of the perhaps-bug is through a Aven digital microscope. The magnification on it isn't bonkers (only 10x-50x), but it is still a heck of lot better than with the unaided eye. (This thing is tiny. If need be, I can find a metric ruler for reference.)

 

OK, thanks, and take care.

[Wrangellian]

I'm doubtful about that being any sort of insect - could be a bit of plant material I think... but wait to see other opinions.

Nice leaf. I agree it looks like an elm but there again I could be wrong. I've got similar specimens from McAbee and Princeton in B.C.  Looks like you could expose the edges a little more, with a pin perhaps (carefully).

[Rockwood]

I too think this looks more like plant material. Perhaps something like a bract from some type of inflorescence. 

Insects from the site tend to have a slightly more shiny  appearance. More glass like perhaps, although I'm not sure it's the best way to describe the look.

You are aware that the specimens need to be stabilized ?

[fossilnut]

@Rockwood

2 hours ago, Rockwood said:

I too think this looks more like plant material. Perhaps something like a bract from some type of inflorescence. 

Insects from the site tend to have a slightly more shiny  appearance. More glass like perhaps, although I'm not sure it's the best way to describe the look.

You are aware that the specimens need to be stabilized ?

Would you please provide more info or reference about how to stabilize. I was able to visit the site years back and would not want to have them deteriorate. Thanks for any info.

[digit]

Agreed that the first image above does look more like a floral bract or some such other botanical bit rather than an insect. From what I've seen online, the preservation of insects seems to be pretty nice from Florissant (or I'm only seeing the nice ones). Probably too late for a stocking stuffer but I think this book is begging to be in your collection.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Fossils-Florissant-Herbert-W-Meyer/dp/1588341070

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[gutenfrog]

Thanks all for the notes, and and for the tips on spotting insects.

 

And yep, I'm planning on stabilizing them tonight.

 

I also will definitely add the Fossils of Florissant book. Holy cow, that looks fun!

[caldigger]

1 hour ago, digit said:

Probably too late for a stocking stuffer but I think this book is begging to be in your collection.

Not if you get their next day delivery! 

[Rockwood]

From a card provided by the owners. 

I have seen Elmer's discouraged by folks on here though. I just gave mine a double coat of Clear Coat.

PS Don't trust your navigator. We ended up in Cripple Creek.

[Rockwood]

Here is a look at the first piece I took out looking for reference to refresh my memory.

[fossilnut]

@RockwoodThanks for taking the time to post the info including how to preserve. It would have taken me weeks to find something like that.

[Rockwood]

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

to refresh my memory.

 

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

I just gave mine a double coat of Clear Coat.

Come to think of it, I did coat the back sides with Elmer's. 'figured it wouldn't interfere if it yellowed with age, and there just might be a good reason for the choice.

Opinions ?

[digit]

I'd treat these fossils similar to the Kemmerer fish fossils. Though other methods like Butvar may be preferred when available, a simple solution of white glue (Elmers) diluted with water is what I used to soak my fishes from Kemmerer. I had a bin that was large enough to just dunk the entire slab into the solution for a minute. It bubbled as the liquid penetrated any cracks or pores. I drained the item well and blotted off any pooling watery glue with a rag. Seemed to work for me and if there has been any yellowing in the last 14 years, I haven't noticed it.

 

With Kemmerer fossils there are lots of little bones and fish scales that could conceivably lift off and so consolidation is a must to protect the fossil long term. From what I've seen of the insect fossils from Florissant, they seem to be more like "prints" into the oil shale with nothing much to lift off. Surface consolidation would seem wise to keep the fossils safe but possibly something as simple as a mat or satin finish clear sealer could be sprayed on as an alternative.

 

Let us know what you try and how it works.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Rockwood]

I'm not sure why, but it seems as if I remember it being the matrix itself that can become unstable in the Florissant material.

[digit]

Then a good dunk/soak in some consolidant may be the best course of action to stabilize things.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[gutenfrog]

All, I've slowly making attempts at splitting the Florissant shale; I'm using a combination of a razor blade/box cutter, and patience. I've had some success, getting a couple perfect splits now and again, but mostly only somewhat succeeding. (Talk about an art form.)

 

I've been taking micrographs as I'm going along, and I thought I'd send two of the weirder targets I've come across. The first two images are what I'm calling "the blob"; whatever apparently had trailing filaments of some variety. Perhaps some sort of algae? The other I'm presuming is plant material of some sort--it was present on both sides of the shale "split" in this case.

 

In any event, thanks for your kind suggestions earlier on, and take care,

[Wrangellian]

I don't know the Florissant material specifically but it looks much like the stuff from other Eocene lake deposits, of which I have some (have had since the 1990s material from McAbee, Princeton, Smithers B.C.), and I have never coated them with anything and have not seen any need to, so I would be wary of any directions to coat them. Certainly Elmer's is not easily undoable if you should ever decide it didn't work and want to remove it.  2 parts Elmer's to 1 part water seems like it would still be too thick. Maybe the other way around? Or 1 to 1? Better yet, use something that is removable, if there is such a thing that can be removed without damaging the fossil.

If it's too glossy or thick, it will be difficult to photograph.

My guess is coatings are recommended for the sake of the average person who will let friends and kids handle the stuff, in which case fragile material always abrades and crumbles. I keep mine safe in a drawer - no one touches! Also safe from humidity, sunlight, etc.

[Rockwood]

It's pure speculation, but I wonder if the blob could be a cuticle that outlived the plant matter that it coated ?

[Rockwood]

42 minutes ago, Wrangellian said:

My guess is coatings are recommended for the sake of the average person who will let friends and kids handle the stuff, in which case fragile material always abrades and crumbles. I keep mine safe in a drawer - no one touches! Also safe from humidity, sunlight, etc.

There do seem to be a good percentage of youngsters and families that visit the site. The family member of the owner who was running things the day we visited was showing extraordinary patience one such youngster. (besides me that is )

[digit]

Yes 2:1 Elmers sounds really thick. The instructions I was given way back when I first collected at Kemmerer was to dilute 1 part of Elmers (or other white glue) in 10 parts of water. This made a watery solution that resembled milk. I suspect it was easier to transport small amounts of the glue deeper into the fossil than a 2:1 which would just be gloppy goo.

 

Sounds like you are making progress splitting the material into its separate bedding planes. My most similar experiences with Kemmerer oil shale plates were about the same. Sometimes you can almost magically pull the material apart into a nice clean virtually perfect split. Of course, those often revealed nothing more than a few fish scales or a coprolite. Seems the layers containing the fishes were always a real pain to get to split cleanly.

 

I suspect there will be a number of unidentifiable bits within the Florissant material. I'm guessing that odd bits like the blob shown above are likely to be (as stated) something botanical like algae or other plant matter. Certainly does not resemble any insect that I can think of. If this were Mazon Creek concretions where things like jellyfish can leave fossilized imprints, then I'd say you have a grand looking jelly there.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[gutenfrog]

Thanks so much. This is really helpful, and it's a fascinating and exciting process. It's really strange to be splitting open something unseen for 34 million years.

[FossilNerd]

1 hour ago, gutenfrog said:

Thanks so much. This is really helpful, and it's a fascinating and exciting process. It's really strange to be splitting open something unseen for 34 million years.

This is one of the many things that is so awesome about fossils. Especially if you can collect, or in this case split, them yourself. You get to see things for the first time. Evidence of life that hasn’t been seen in many many (sometimes many millions) of years. How cool is that?! 

[minnbuckeye]

21 hours ago, Rockwood said:

I'm not sure why, but it seems as if I remember it being the matrix itself that can become unstable in the Florissant material.

 

I spent a few hours at the quarry on my last (and it was my first) visit to Colorado. After seeing the word "preservation" associated with these fossils in this post, I went to the barn and checked my samples. Some of the wood lightened dramatically over the last 2 years, but the leaves maintained their color. Rockwood mentioned my BIGGEST problem,  the matrix deteriorated on many samples, some just splitting into pieces and some turning into a crumbled mess. So I would strongly consolidate somehow. Mine are now consolidated with Butvar.

 

Mike

[minnbuckeye]

Uncle Siphuncle posted:  

Florissant Finds

In that post, I provided Fossil Identification Material that I had photographed from the owner's ID book to help me. Check it out if you are unsure of something. I know I would have pitched a few things, not knowing their significance.

 

 Mike

[Rockwood]

4 hours ago, digit said:

Sometimes you can almost magically pull the material apart into a nice clean virtually perfect split.

The proper moisture content is very important at both sites. Blocks are typically kept dry for splitting if I remember correctly. 

[digit]

At the Kemmerer quarries blocks are usually pulled from their in situ positions and lined up to dry out a bit before splitting. One of the times we visited was late in the season and the area had just had a dousing of rain. The blocks were very difficult to split then.

 

I'd assume that Florissant blocks that are shipped for folks to split have likely been dried before sending. The moisture content could easily be tested by placing one in a zip-top plastic bag (they make these bags up to 2-gallon sizes which will accommodate pretty large blocks). If left overnight--or better yet in a sunny spot for several hours--any latent moisture in a block would become evident by the appearance of condensation on the inside of the bag. I see this quite often on fossil specimens I dig up and place in zip-top baggies while out volunteer digging at sites like Montbrook with the FLMNH. The matrix that we are digging in usually has some residual moisture but is usually not highly noticeable till you lock a fossil piece in an air tight bag and see it visibly releasing its moisture content.

 

Though I've never split material from Florissant, I'd expect that any blocks that contained unwanted moisture might be able to be dried by placing them in a sunny indoor spot. Air conditioning in the summer and heating during the winter both have the effect of keeping indoor air relatively dry. I'm guessing that they might also be able to be pushed along by putting them on a sheet in the oven set at a low temperature (like 250F) with the door cracked open just a bit. Welcome extra heat to warm a house in mid-winter but rather at odds with A/C cooling a house in the summer. I've dried trays of micro-matrix this way when rainy conditions disallow my usual method of artisanally sun-drying on a tarp on my driveway.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken