Can i get a more specific ID on these ammonites please?

[KingSepron]

I found these ammonites in the Isle of Wight ~8 years ago, roughly in this condition (bit more mud). I found them on a non-fossil beach, and they are basically what got me into the whole thing. I’d love to know more about them pls!

 

I don’t know the exact beach i found them on, but I know it was a Cretaceous area.

[Ludwigia]

I'm getting a Perisphinctes vibe on these ones. Are you sure about Cretaceous?

[KingSepron]

22 minutes ago, Ludwigia said:

I'm getting a Perisphinctes vibe on these ones. Are you sure about Cretaceous?

I mean I'm not certain, but the Isle of Wight is mostly Cretaceous according to this site:

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html

[FossilDAWG]

1 hour ago, KingSepron said:

I mean I'm not certain, but the Isle of Wight is mostly Cretaceous according to this site:

http://mapapps.bgs.ac.uk/geologyofbritain/home.html

However Ludwigia is right, these are perisphinctids and definitely Jurassic (Oxfordian to Kimmeridgian).  Something is off here.  Are you sure you collected these from an outcrop?  Could you be misremembering the site?

 

Don

[KingSepron]

1 minute ago, FossilDAWG said:

However Ludwigia is right, these are perisphinctids and definitely Jurassic (Oxfordian to Kimmeridgian).  Something is off here.  Are you sure you collected these from an outcrop?  Could you be misremembering the site?

 

Don

According to the site I posted, there are no jurassic sites on the Isle of Wight. 

 

I just messaged my granddad asking him exactly where they were found, just incase they weren't Isle of Wight, but I'm sure they were.

[FossilDAWG]

8 minutes ago, KingSepron said:

According to the site I posted, there are no jurassic sites on the Isle of Wight.

Nevertheless, they are Jurassic ammonites.  As I said, something is off here.

 

Don

[KingSepron]

Just now, FossilDAWG said:

Nevertheless, they are Jurassic ammonites.  As I said, something is off here.

 

Don

Just out of interest, how can you tell?

[fifbrindacier]

Hi, if you write perisphinctid ion your search engine, you'll see articles that tells you they are Jurassic.

All the perisphinctid i have are Oxfordian or Kimmeridgian.

[FossilDAWG]

Ammonites are classic "index fossils".  Many ammonite groups evolved fairly rapidly, so particular genera and species had a narrow time range.  On the other hand, many types of ammonites had a wide geographic occurrence.  This means they were ideal for correlating rocks over long distances, because when you find the same species in rocks at widely separated localities you can be confident that the rocks are the same age, within a narrow range.  The whole of the Mesozoic is divided into a succession of ammonite zones, each one lasting perhaps a few million years. 

 

In this particular case, your ammonites are perisphinctids, a distinctive group of ammonites that are different from other ammonites.  Perisphinctids flourished during part of the Upper Jurassic, during the Oxfordian and Kimmeridgian stages.  During this time, there were many genera of perisphictids, such as Perisphinctes, Dichotomosphinctes, Idoceras, etc., each with numerous species.  If we could ID your specimens to species we could narrow down the time frame within the Oxfordian or Kimmeridgian even more precisely.  At any rate, during the Kimmeridgian the perisphinctids were replaced with other ammonite types, and died out, so no perisphinctids have been found in rocks younger than the Kimmeridgian.  They cannot have come from Cretaceous rocks.

 

Don

[Ludwigia]

One possibility is that these ammonites were deposited at the site where you think you remember to have found them by another collecter who perhaps even inadvertently lost them there. Particularly your mention that the site was a non-fossil beach made me suspicous from the start.

[KingSepron]

The fossils were definitely found on the Isle of Wight, which does not have a Jurassic area, and I found them myself underneath a rock. The beach was not known for fossils, but it could have been fossilous.

[KingSepron]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Isle_of_Wight

According to the geology on the island, there are some Jurassic rocks on the subsurface. I guess it could be possible that this effected it.

[KingSepron]

Pictures of the other side of the ammonites

[FossilDAWG]

So let me see if I understand this correctly.  You found these three ammonites, not even embedded in rock but just with a little bit of mud on them, clustered together underneath a rock on a beach not known for fossils.  Three Jurassic ammonites, huddled together under a rock, on an island where all the exposed rock is Cretacous and could not have produced these ammonites?  And no, ammonites cannot have burrowed through hundreds of feet of overlying Cretaceous rock from subsurface Jurassic rock.  They certainly would not have stayed together in a group of three through that already impossible process.  Also if that beach authentically produced such ammonites in clusters like you found, it would certainly be well known to local collectors and would not be considered to be a "non-fossil beach".

 

Here is an alternative hypothesis, tell me what you think.  I assume (or guess if you prefer) that you were a child when these were "found", as you say you need to check with your grandfather to confirm where they were found.  A family member purchased these ammonites from a rock shop (they look very much like Moroccan ammonites widely available in rock shops).  Instead of just giving them to you, they decided to make it more fun by hiding them under a rock and suggesting you should look in that area and see if there are any fossils.  People do this sometimes, for example buying a baggie of shark teeth and sprinkling them on the ground or beach for their kids to "find".  This practice is called "salting", and it is fun for kids but discouraged by serious collectors because it results in "out of place" fossils that can create a lot of confusion when found by someone who knows the local geology.

 

Don

[FranzBernhard]

Interesting puzzle!

 

51 minutes ago, KingSepron said:

I found them myself underneath a rock.

Was this purely by chance or have you intentionally overturned rocks? How many rocks have you overturned? Just for fun? Did you search for anything else? What else did you find fossil-wise?

Yes, I am insisting, but we all would like know the solution to this puzzle. The more details, the better.

 

Btw, these ammos are wonderfully preserved. Did you prep them or are they as you have found them? (I see, no prep, just cleaning).

It should be possible to ID them at least to genus level and narrow down the age range. Just to see if they fit with the subsurface Jurassic.

 

Edid: Don may have hit the nail on its head!

 

Franz Bernhard

[KingSepron]

3 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

So let me see if I understand this correctly.  You found these three ammonites, not even embedded in rock but just with a little bit of mud on them, clustered together underneath a rock on a beach not known for fossils.  Three Jurassic ammonites, huddled together under a rock, on an island where all the exposed rock is Cretacous and could not have produced these ammonites?  And no, ammonites cannot have burrowed through hundreds of feet of overlying Cretaceous rock from subsurface Jurassic rock.  They certainly would not have stayed together in a group of three through that already impossible process.  Also if that beach authentically produced such ammonites in clusters like you found, it would certainly be well known to local collectors and would not be considered to be a "non-fossil beach".

 

Here is an alternative hypothesis, tell me what you think.  I assume (or guess if you prefer) that you were a child when these were "found", as you say you need to check with your grandfather to confirm where they were found.  A family member purchased these ammonites from a rock shop (they look very much like Moroccan ammonites widely available in rock shops).  Instead of just giving them to you, they decided to make it more fun by hiding them under a rock and suggesting you should look in that area and see if there are any fossils.  People do this sometimes, for example buying a baggie of shark teeth and sprinkling them on the ground or beach for their kids to "find".  This practice is called "salting", and it is fun for kids but discouraged by serious collectors because it results in "out of place" fossils that can create a lot of confusion when found by someone who knows the local geology.

 

Don

I'll ask him

[KingSepron]

1 minute ago, FranzBernhard said:

Interesting puzzle!

 

Was this purely by chance or have you intentionally overturned rocks? How many rocks have you overturned? Just for fun? Did you search for anything else? What else did you find fossil-wise?

Yes, I am insisting, but we all would like know the solution to this puzzle. The more details, the better.

 

Btw, these ammos are wonderfully preserved. Did you prep them or are they as you have found them? (I see, no prep, just cleaning).

It should be possible to ID them at least to genus level and narrow down the age range. Just to see if they fit with the subsurface Jurassic.

 

Franz Bernhard

I mostly just cleaned them

[KingSepron]

7 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

So let me see if I understand this correctly.  You found these three ammonites, not even embedded in rock but just with a little bit of mud on them, clustered together underneath a rock on a beach not known for fossils.  Three Jurassic ammonites, huddled together under a rock, on an island where all the exposed rock is Cretacous and could not have produced these ammonites?  And no, ammonites cannot have burrowed through hundreds of feet of overlying Cretaceous rock from subsurface Jurassic rock.  They certainly would not have stayed together in a group of three through that already impossible process.  Also if that beach authentically produced such ammonites in clusters like you found, it would certainly be well known to local collectors and would not be considered to be a "non-fossil beach".

 

Here is an alternative hypothesis, tell me what you think.  I assume (or guess if you prefer) that you were a child when these were "found", as you say you need to check with your grandfather to confirm where they were found.  A family member purchased these ammonites from a rock shop (they look very much like Moroccan ammonites widely available in rock shops).  Instead of just giving them to you, they decided to make it more fun by hiding them under a rock and suggesting you should look in that area and see if there are any fossils.  People do this sometimes, for example buying a baggie of shark teeth and sprinkling them on the ground or beach for their kids to "find".  This practice is called "salting", and it is fun for kids but discouraged by serious collectors because it results in "out of place" fossils that can create a lot of confusion when found by someone who knows the local geology.

 

Don

Ah yeah he did plant them :/

Ah well.

[FossilDAWG]

We did figure it out, and you had the fun of finding them.  It's great that you have family that are trying to indulge your hobby.  And, they are very nice ammonites.

 

Don

[Tidgy's Dad]

Just for the record, the Isle of Wight does have some excellent Eocene fossil locations as well as a bit of Oligocene besides the Cretaceous stuff. 

Not that that helps regarding ammonites particularly. 

[KingSepron]

2 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

We did figure it out, and you had the fun of finding them.  It's great that you have family that are trying to indulge your hobby.  And, they are very nice ammonites.

 

Don

Well, this wasn't really my hobby at the time, I was like 11 and my grandpa was quite into it.

 

It's a shame really because I've been so proud of these for quite a while, but I'm glad he did it for me because it's what got me into palaeontology.

[Ludwigia]

@FossilDAWG Don, you should open up a private detective agency on the side 

[FossilDAWG]

1 hour ago, Ludwigia said:

@FossilDAWG Don, you should open up a private detective agency on the side 

As Sherlock Holmes "said", once all the other possibilities are exhausted what is left must be true.

 

Don

[FossilDAWG]

1 hour ago, KingSepron said:

... I was like 11 and my grandpa was quite into it.

 

... but I'm glad he did it for me because it's what got me into palaeontology.

That's the important thing.  If your grandpa had just handed you those ammonites, they probably would not have been as successful in stimulating your interest.  Plus, I am guessing that you shared time with your grandpa looking for and talking about fossils, time you might not otherwise have spent with him.  So he gave you three gifts: time spent with him doing something you both enjoy, a hobby you can enjoy for your whole life if you want, and three nice ammonites.  I'd say that was a pretty spectacular gift.

 

Don

[piranha]

2 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

As Sherlock Holmes "said", once all the other possibilities are exhausted what is left must be true.

 

Don

 

 

Such an elegant approach ... I wonder ... could the same axiom be applied to smallish theropod dinosaurs?